Branscheid v. Branscheid

Citations

• 27 Wash. 368
• 67 P. 812
• 1902 Wash. LEXIS 402

Syllabus

<p>HUSBAND AND WIFE-ACTION FOR SEPARATE MAINTENANCE-SUFFICIENCY OF COMPLAINT.</p> <p>In an action for maintenance brought by a wife on the ground that she was compelled to live separate and apart from her husband, the complaint states a cause of action when it alleges that plaintiff has at all times since-marriage conducted herself as a true and affectionate wife, and has at all times done all in her power to contribute to the domestic happiness of her husband and child, but that her husband refuses to receive or treat her as his wife, has repeatedly declared he would not again live with her nor maintain herself nor child, and has ever since a specified date contributed nothing whatever to her support.</p> <p>SAME-STATUS OF REAL PROPERTY POWER OF COURT TO DETERMINE.</p> <p>In an action brought by the wife for separate maintenance, the court has jurisdiction to determine the status of their real estate, under Bal. Code, § 5723, which provides that “in granting a divorce the court shall also make such disposition of the property of the parties as shall appear just and equitable.”</p> <p>SAME-DIVOECE-CBUEL TBEATMENT-PLEADING.</p> <p>A wife’s lack of interest in her husband and his affairs, her refusal to enter into the mode of life which he desired to follow socially, her constant repining, and the fact that she was moody, whimsical, exacting and irascible would not constitute cruel treatment, even though causing her husband mental suffering.</p> <p>SAME — ADMISSIBILITY OE EVIDENCE.</p> <p>Under the rule that acts which are sought to be proven for the purpose of showing cruelty must be specifically alleged, it was not error for the court to reject proof that defendant had denied plaintiff the customary marital rights, when the cross-complaint failed to set up that fact.</p>