PERRY B. KING, APPELLANT,
v.
JENNIE P. KING, 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.
Perry King appealed a divorce decree awarding his wife monthly maintenance of $50 and attorney's fees. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the decree, finding it fully warranted based on the husband's cruel treatment, refusal to reconcile, and adequate financial capacity to support the modest monthly allowance.
The decree awarding $50 monthly maintenance to the wife and attorney's fees was fully warranted and is affirmed. The modest monthly allowance is appropriate given the husband's substantial business income and his cruel treatment of the wife coupled with his refusal to reconcile.
“The breach arising originally out of disagreements between the wife and two grown step-daughters whose side the husband took, drove the wife first to apartments in the house separate from the husband, and then to a sister's home.”
Establishes the factual basis for the separation and the husband's role in causing the marital breakdown.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe spouses separated after disagreements between the wife and the husband's two adult daughters, whom the husband sided with. The wife moved first to…
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 Separate Maintenance cases and more on FLexlaw
Cockrell, J.
Upon an appeal by the husband from a decree awarding a monthly stipend to the wife and an attorney’s fee for separate maintenance, the wife has petitioned this court for an order to require the appellant to pay her such an amount as may be needed to have her interests protected here. There is no intimation that the wife is not satisfied with the decree, and the husband has fully presented his contentions upon the merits.
Upon an examination of the transcript and this brief, we have no hesitancy in declaring the decree was fully warranted. The breach arising originally out of disagreements between the wife and two grown step-daughters whose side the husband took, drove the wife first to apartments in the house separate from the husband, and then to a sister’s home. From the time of the mutual separation in the home there was no intercourse between the married pair, and the husband refused all efforts at reconciliation, and still declares his intention never to resume the relation of husband and wife. Various acts of harsh, even cruel treatment by the husband, are alleged and proved, and no immoral conduct on the part of the wife is even suggested.
The amount of the attorney’s fee in the Circuit Court was fixed by consent of all parties, and the allowance of fifty dollars a month to the wife is upon the evidence as to the faculties of the parties a modest one. The husband is a druggist in the City of Tampa, doing a business of sixty thousand dollars gross annually, and he does not make it appear satisfactorily that practically all of this is eaten up by expenses, and it does appear that he with his two grown daughters are living on a plane, not to be attained by the abandoned wife on this allowance.
There being no occasion for the aid of counsel to the wife, her petition will be denied, and the decree will be affirmed.
Shackleford, C. J., and Taylor, Hocker and Whitfield, J. J., concur.