IN DIVORCE
ADAMS v. ADAMS, " *' ' ' ' . '.',■■
Statements nrade yesterday in the hearing of the petition of Edward Adams for dissolution, of marriage with Margaret Stella- Adams, that dhe respondent ha 4 been left alone, with a Chinaman by the petitioner, were contradicted by evidence for the respondent given yesterday afternoon and this morning. After hearing evidence by the co-respondent, Olsen, this morning, and counsel's addresses, his Honour the Chief Justice (the Hon. C. P. Skerrett) reserved his decision to look into the authorities cited.. The grounds of the petition were adultery, which was admitted by the respondent, but the defence alleged that the'actions of the petitioner had induced .the offence! Mr. Luckie, for the respondent, contended that adultery had not been proved prior to the separation of the parties, and that the subsequent' adultery could not be. due to the influence of the petitioner. Mr; Treadwell, for tho respondent, argued that the adultery was the result of , petitioner'g conduct over a long period. ,^ tm^,^bll^" ]y
Permanent link to this item
https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/EP19260211.2.107
Bibliographic details
Evening Post, Volume CXI, Issue 36, 11 February 1926, Page 10
Word Count
164IN DIVORCE Evening Post, Volume CXI, Issue 36, 11 February 1926, Page 10
Using This Item
Stuff Ltd is the copyright owner for the Evening Post. You can reproduce in-copyright material from this newspaper for non-commercial use under a Creative Commons BY-NC-SA 3.0 New Zealand licence. This newspaper is not available for commercial use without the consent of Stuff Ltd. For advice on reproduction of out-of-copyright material from this newspaper, please refer to the Copyright guide.