Crutcher v. Crutcher
Crutcher v. Crutcher
Opinion of the Court
delivered the opinion of the court.
The demurrer should have been overruled. We hold the crime of pederasty to be cruel and inhuman treatment, within the meaning of our statutes on the subject. We approve the reasoning of the Ohio case cited by counsel for the appellant. That court says (quoting from Mr. Bishop in the fourth edition of his work on Marriage and Divorce) : “ ‘Cruelty, in the sense of the statutes on this subject, is such conduct in one of the married parties as renders his continuance of cohabitation either so dangerous to the other party in fact, or attended with such reasonable apprehension in the mind of the other, to the physical distress or discomfort of the other, as to demand his separation on the ground of the real physical safety of the other, or of mental or physical capacity of the other to discharge well the duties of husband or wife.’ 1 Bishop on
Reversed, demurrer overruledj, and cause remanded, with leave to ansiver in thirty days from the filing of the mandate in the court below.
Reference
- Full Case Name
- Frances E. Crutcher v. George T. Crutcher
- Cited By
- 17 cases
- Status
- Published
- Syllabus
- Divobce. Gruel and inhuman treatment. Pederasty. Code 1893, g 1563. The crime of pederasty, whether restricted to sodomy, as commonly understood, or defined so as to include bestial habits and improper intimacy by a man with the male sex, is cruel and inhuman treatment, within the meaning of Code 1892, § 1562, making “habitual, cruel, and inhuman treatment” a ground for divorce.