Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

DEFENDED DIVORCE SUIT

VERDICT FOR PETITIONER. DECISION BY MAJORITY. DECREE NISI GRANTED. The (Mended divorce suit in which Kate Smith (Mr. McLiver, instructed by Mr. Matthews), petitioned lor a dissolution of tier marriage with Arthur Samuel Smith (Mr. Dickson), was concluded yesterday at the Supreme Court, before Mr. Justice Cooper and a jury. The. -round of the petition was that the respondent had committed adultery with the petitioner's niece more than two years prior to the date of the petition. 'Evidence to this effect was given by the me. e. Ihe allegation was denied by the respondent. Addressing the Court on behalf of the respondent, Mr. Dickson said it was unbelievable that a girl who had been wronged would keep the matter secret for over two years, and then disclose it. Re--ardinj the petitioner's contention that the respondent had admitted the allegation of adultery in a letter to his wife, counsel emphasised that the respondent had written several letters begging her forgiveness for anything he had done. He had nisi) begged her to tell him the reason for her leaving him. Counsel for the petitioner contended thai the evidence of the niece had not been refuted, and that the respondent had admitted Ins guilt in a letter to the it inner. Ihe Judge. st the conclusion of his <nmnmig up. said the issues for the jury to consider were : -Did the respondent <ommi> adultery- as alleged; if so, had the offence teen condoned by the petitioner? After a retirement of over three hours ice jury returned a majority verdict in favour of the petitioner on 'both issues, mid on the first issue an affirmative findnip was returned by a majority of 11 to 1 On the second issue a negative finding ■vac returned by a majority of 9 to 3. ' Counsel for petitioner moved for a c. rjep nisi. The Judge granted a decree, to be moved absolute in three months, interim iustody of the children being given to th.' petitioner. Costs were awarded a- ;,• ; the respondent on the lower scale %i' an extra £10 10s for the second da-. ,',; hearing.

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/NZH19201211.2.97

Bibliographic details

New Zealand Herald, Volume LVII, Issue 17651, 11 December 1920, Page 11

Word Count
351

DEFENDED DIVORCE SUIT New Zealand Herald, Volume LVII, Issue 17651, 11 December 1920, Page 11

DEFENDED DIVORCE SUIT New Zealand Herald, Volume LVII, Issue 17651, 11 December 1920, Page 11

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert