GEORGE E. MCGEE
v.
FANNIE MCLEOD MCGEE
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.
In this Florida divorce case, the Supreme Court affirmed the trial court's dissolution of marriage between George E. McGee and Fannie McLeod McGee, finding no reversible error in the chancellor's determination that the parties were incompatible and the marriage had irretrievably failed.
The court affirmed the dissolution of the marriage, finding that the complainant's testimony was materially corroborated by the defendant's own admissions and that the trial court properly determined the parties were incompatible and incapable of maintaining a successful marriage.
“This couple can never sail the matrimonial sea, except in storm, tempest, fog and misery. They can only wound and never comfort one another.”
The court's characterization of the fundamental incompatibility between the parties, establishing the basis for affirming the divorce.
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 and respondent were an older couple who married late in life after previously living independent lives. From the marriage's inception, t…
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 Corroboration Of Testimony cases and more on FLexlaw
On inspection of the entire record, we find no reversible error revealed thereby.
Appellant contends that there is nothing in the record corroborating the testimony of the complainant in the court below. We find, as did the chancellor, that complainant’s testimony is not entirely uncorroborated. It is in many material respects corroborated by thé testimony of the defendant. ■ He admits that he sometimes called her a “damned fool” but contends that he was justified therein because he had reason to believe her to be such. He admits that he told or wrote plaintiff that he was indulging in illicit relations with another woman but says he told her that just to make her jealous. Certainly, he pursued a course to obtain that end. He might have been justified if he had been making a confession but he says his statement in this regard was false. So it could have been made only for the purpose of causing pain and misery to the plaintiff. A man can hardly be found who is so anxious for a domestic row as to tell his wife that he is having such relations with another woman, whether the statement be true or false.
The record shows that this is a case in which two people past the age of romantic youth and who had walked alone the pathway of life until they met where their paths turned down the western slope, then joined in the bonds of matrimony and attempted to *33assume the obligations of husband and wife. From the very first the venture was a failure. Neither appear to have been fitted by temperament, or otherwise, for the marriage estate. Both sought, found and made use of every opportunity to annoy, harass, and anger the other, and each was remarkably successful in this regard and appears in every other way to have been a hopeless failure.
This couple can never sail the matrimonial sea, except in storm, tempest, fog and misery. They can only wound and never comfort one another.
The chancellor reached a wise conclusion when he dissolved the legal bonds of matrimony and let them each go without further obligation to the other. There are no ties to bind them and no property for them to wrangle over.
No reversible error appearing from the entire record, the decree is affirmed.
So ordered.
BROWN, C. J., WHITFIELD and ADAMS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Lyon v. Lyon, 54 So. 2d 679 (Fla. 1951)…lty of other misconduct of a similar nature. The specific acts of misconduct alleged and testified to by plaintiff were not denied by defendant and, in fact, ample corroboration may be found in the defendant's own testimony. *681 See McGee v. McGee, 149 Fla. 31, 5 So. 2d 49. There was some conflict between the testimony of the plaintiff and that of the defendant as to the defendant's general attitude towards plaintiff; but the Special Master, who observed the demeanor of the parties, evidently chose to bel…1 / 2
-
Betts v. Betts, 63 So. 2d 302 (Fla. 1953)…ave gone so far as to hold this to be true even if a wife deserts him without cause.” Gordon v. Gordon, supra [59 So. 2d 47], See also Hudson v. Hudson, 59 Fla. 529, 51 So. 857, 29 L.R.A..N.S., 614. We think that, as in McGee v. McGee, 149 Fla. 31, 5 So. 2d 49, “This couple can never sail the matrimonial sea, except in storm, tempest, fog and misery. They can only wound and never comfort one another.” The evidence was ample to sustain Mrs. Betts’ charge of desertion against Mr. Betts, and the Chancellor m…
-
Cole v. Cole, 3 Fla. Supp. 91 (Dade Cty. Cir. Ct. 1953)…ere is no need for such discussion. There is ample evidentiary basis for the entry of a decree by which the bonds of [*94] matrimony shall be dissolved. The Supreme Court, in Diem v. Diem, 193 So. 65, Bergman v. Bergman, 199 So. 920, McGee v. McGee, 5 So. 2d 49, Loomis v. Loomis, 20 So. 2d 125, and Garland v. Garland, 29 So. 2d 693, and other cases, has established modern and sensible standards by which the conduct and attitudes of the parties to this suit should be gauged. The testimony makes it obvious,…
Previewing 3 of 6 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence