{
  "id": 1523356,
  "name": "Wann v. Wann",
  "name_abbreviation": "Wann v. Wann",
  "decision_date": "1908-03-16",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "471",
  "last_page": "473",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "85 Ark. 471"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ark.",
    "id": 8808,
    "name": "Arkansas Supreme Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 34,
    "name_long": "Arkansas",
    "name": "Ark."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "37 Ark. 27",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ark.",
      "case_ids": [
        1870919
      ],
      "opinion_index": -1,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ark/37/0027-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 256,
    "char_count": 4003,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.682,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 1.745357876184164e-07,
      "percentile": 0.7076924175888247
    },
    "sha256": "ee4a6c2d1745e66e9ea4ae4f6fdcd2b0c89b41cb3e4b0817f7bc79255cdf3c3a",
    "simhash": "1:0f91a19757e384d7",
    "word_count": 672
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T18:26:10.611504+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Wann v. Wann."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Battue, J.\nJoseph W. Wann asked for a divorce from his wife, Dizzie J. Wann, and for the custody of their child, Virgie May. For cause of divorce he alleged that his wife \u201chabitually and systematically pursued a course of personal indignities towards him, consisting of unmerited reproach, rudeness, contempt, studied neglect and open insult, which conduct was persisted in by her until his condition was rendered intolerable.\u201d\nThe defendant answered and denied that she was guilty of the personal indignities alleged by the plaintiff against her, and alleged for cause for divorce from her husband that he had been a \u201cshiftless and improvident man,\u201d \u201cand that he had repeatedly spoken slanderously about her to others, accusing her of intimacy with other men, and thus rendering her life intolerable\u201d ; and asked for divorce and custody of their child.\nThe court rendered a decree dismissing plaintiff\u2019s complaint for want of equity, and granting her a divorce and giving her the custody of the child.\nWe think that the evidence sustains the allegations of the complaint. The defendant had repeatedly and for some time abused plaintiff unmercifully, applied to him opprobrious epithets, treated him with contumely, beyond his manhood to bear and sufficient to render his condition intolerable. Her town testimony supports the allegations of his complaint, and shows hatred and contempt for her husband. She said to one witness that \u201cshe hated him worse than anything on earth\u201d, and \u201cthat it would do her more good than anything else to kill him.\u201d How could his condition under such circumstances be otherwise than intolerable?\nThey have only one child, a little girl, named Virgie May. She is about six years old, of that age when she needs the care of a mother. He has no home or property. The mother is financially able to provide for her. We think that the mother should have the present custody of the little girl; but, whatever orders are made in this regard, they should be expressly temporary in their .operation, and, subject at all times to be revoked or modified, to the end that the care and control of the child may be under the strict supervision of the court; and that, while in the custody of the mother, the father should be allowed to visit her at all reasonable hours.\nThe decree of the chancery court is reversed, the complaint of appellee is dismissed, and the cause is remanded with directions to the court to render a decree in accordance with this opinion.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Battue, J."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Henderson & Campbell, for appellant.",
      "Appellee pro se."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Wann v. Wann.\nOpinion delivered March 16, 1908.\n1. Divorce \u2014 sufficiency of evidence. \u2014 Evidence that a wife had repeatedly and for some time abused her husband unmercifully, applied to him opprobrious epithets, and treated him with contumely sufficient to render his condition intolerable, was sufficient 'to entitle him to a divorce. (Page 472.)\n2. Divorce \u2014 custody of infant child. \u2014 Where, upon granting a husband a divorce from his wife, the custody of their only child, a girl six years old, is awarded to the mother because she needs the mother\u2019s - care, and because the mother is financially better able to provide for her, the court\u2019s orders in regard to the child\u2019s custody-should be temporary and subject to be revoked or modified, to the end that the care and custody of the child may be under the strict supervision of the court; and while the child is 'in the mother\u2019s custody, the father should be allowed to visit her at all reasonable hours. (Page' 473-)\nAppeal from Randolph Chancery Court, George T. Humphries, Chancellor;\nreversed.\nHenderson & Campbell, for appellant.\n1. In dismissing appellant\u2019s complaint for want of proof to support its allegations, the court\u2019s decree is' contrary to the clear preponderance of the testimony; and likewise the decree in her favor on the cross complaint is not supported by the weight of the evidence.\n2. The father was entitled to the care and custody of the child. Kirby\u2019s Digest, \u00a7 3757; Tiffany\u2019s Persons & Dom. Rel., 249 et seq.; 37 Ark. 27.\nAppellee pro se."
  },
  "file_name": "0471-01",
  "first_page_order": 491,
  "last_page_order": 493
}