ANNIE IRMA TIPPIN, APPELLANT,
v.
A. C. TIPPIN, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The Florida Supreme Court affirmed a lower court's dismissal of a wife's bill for alimony, finding that the evidence did not support her claims of mistreatment by her husband.
No, the proofs did not sustain the material allegations necessary to entitle the complainant to the relief prayed for.
“The proofs do not sustain the material allegations necessary to entitle the complainant to the relief prayed, and the court did not err in dismissing the bill of complaint.”
This quote explains the court's primary reason for affirming the dismissal of the alimony claim.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe appellant (wife) filed a bill for alimony, alleging her husband's conduct made it impossible to live with him without danger to her health and ris…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Cruelty cases and more on FLexlaw
Whitfield, C. J.
The appellant brought a bill for alimony alone in which it is alleged that the parties are husband and wife; that the defendant’s conduct towards complainant was such that it became impossible for her to longer live with him without danger of wrecking her health and receiving at his hands great bodily injury, particulars being given somewhat in detail. It is further alleged that for these reasons alone the complainant was forced to leave the home of the defendant; that she has no property and must depend on others for support. The answer of the defendant denies the allegations as to mistreatment, and explains some of the specific charges of cruelty.
The proofs do not sustain the material allegations necessary to entitle the complainant to the relief prayed, and the court did not err in dismissing the bill of complaint. Temporary alimony and attorney fees were allowed the complainant by the trial court, and the order of the court taxing costs against the complainant will not be reversed.
The decree is affirmed.
Shackleford and Cockrell, J. J., concur;
Taylor, Hocker and Parkhill, J. J., concur in the opinion.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Cobb v. Cobb, 82 Fla. 287 (Fla. 1921)…5 So. 35. In a proceeding of this character where the marriage relation is established, the Court has power to require the husband to provide temporary alimony and suit money for his wife. See Wood v. Wood, 56 Fla. 882, 47 So. 560; Tippin v. Tippin, 60 Fla. 378, 53 So. 838. Upon the question of the sufficiency of the evidence to support the allegations of the bill the rule is that the Chan [*290] cellor’s finding on the facts will be accorded tbe same weight as the verdict of a jury and a decree solely on…
-
Kiplinger v. Kiplinger, 147 Fla. 243 (Fla. 1941)…5 So. 35. In a proceeding of this character where the marriage relation is established, the Court has power to require the husband to provide temporary alimony and suit money for his wife. See Wood v. Wood, 56 Fla. 882, 47 So. 560; Tippin v. Tippin, 60 Fla. 378, 53 So. 838.” The case of Howell v. Howell, 113 Fla. 129, 151 So. 379, was a suit under the provisions of Section 4989 C. G. L., and the bill of complaint alleged that the defendant at the time of filing the bill of complaint was within the jurisdi…