EUGENE A. BRADFORD, APPELLANT,
v.
EDNA W. BRADFORD, 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 court held that the admission of letters was proper and the corroborating evidence was sufficient to support the ground of extreme cruelty for divorce.
The appeal challenges a final decree of divorce granted on the ground of extreme cruelty. The appellant also contested the admission of letters found …
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 Divorce cases and more on FLexlaw
This appeal challenges the sufficiency of the evidence to support a final decree of divorce. The divorce was granted upon the ground of “extreme cruelty by defendant to complainant.” In addition, appellant challenges the admission into evidence of letters found in the possession of the defendant and also urges that there was insufficient corroboration of the acts alleged to constitute extreme cruelty.
The admission of the letters into evidence for the purpose of establishing possession of them by the defendant was proper. Cf. Pauline v. Lee, Fla.App.1962, 147 So.2d 359; 31A C.J.S. Evidence § 194. The rule as to corroboration is that in contested cases where it is clear there is no collusion, the corroboration need only be slight. Lear v. Lear, Fla.1957, 95 So.2d 519. As we view the evidence, the corroborating testimony was adequate to sustain the charge of extreme cruelty. See Martin v. Martin, Fla.App.1958, 102 So.2d 837, 839.
Upon the issue of the weight and the sufficiency of the evidence, we find that there was sufficient evidence, if believed by the chancellor, to support the ground alleged. See Perry v. Perry, Fla.App.1957, 97 So.2d 152.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Elisabeth P. Hillyard v. Hillyard, 212 So. 2d 306 (Fla. 2d DCA 1968)…6.13; 3 U.Fla.L.Rev. 125 (1950). The harshness of the rule has been minimized, however, by the sensible position taken by the courts of this state that corroboration need only be slight in contested divorce cases. Bradford v. Bradford, Fla.App.1967, 204 So. 2d 344; Clutter v. Clutter, Fla.App.1965, 171 So. 2d 544; Dings v. Dings, Fla.App.1964, 161 So. 2d 227. The corroboration rule is predicated upon two ancient and independent doctrines. The first, born of English ecclesiastical law provided that the uncorr…
Authorities Cited
- Pauline v. LEE, 147 So. 2d 359 (Fla. 2d DCA 1962)
- Martin v. Martin, 102 So. 2d 837 (Fla. 2d DCA 1958)
- Nannie Lou Coulter v. Coulter, 97 So. 2d 152 (Fla. 1st DCA 1957)
- Oberkirch v. City OF ST. Petersburg, 95 So. 2d 519 (Fla. 1957)