Jones v. Jones

Citations

• 96 Wash. 172
• 164 P. 757
• 1917 Wash. LEXIS 889

Syllabus

<p>Husband and Wife — Alienation of Affections — Evidence—Malice — Sufficiency. In an action against her father-in-law for alienation of her husband’s affections, malice may be inferred from the conduct of the defendant; and the evidence of malice is sufficient where it appears that the defendant conducted all the negotiations leading to the marriage to avoid a criminal prosecution, after which there was an immediate desertion of the plaintiff, to whom the husband had been very attentive and affectionate until the interposition of the defendant in the matter.</p> <p>Same — Alienation of Affections — Evidence—Declarations of Husband. In such an action, evidence is admissible of a declaration by the husband that his father had forbidden him to talk with the plaintiff.</p> <p>Same. In such an action, declarations of the husband purporting to show want of affection for the plaintiff are inadmissible, as being an evasion of Rem. Code, § 1214, providing that one spouse shall not be examined for or against the other without such other’s consent; nor, under such statute, could the.husband testify as to his disposition toward plaintiff prior to the marriage.</p> <p>Same — Alienation of Affections — Damages—Excessive Verdict. In an action against a father-in-law for alienation of a husband’s affections, a verdict for $25,000, reduced by the trial court to $12,500 is not excessive, where it appears that the defendant consented to the marriage for the purpose of avoiding a criminal prosecution against his son, with the ultimate idea of securing a divorce, and that he was the active agency in keeping the spouses apart.</p> <p>Continuance — Newly Discovered Evidence — Discretion. It is discretionary to refuse to grant a continuance at the close of the trial for the purpose of presenting further evidence.</p>