Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
8 Alabama opinions name it 2 courts 1857–2014 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Alabama courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Bryan v. Bryangreen2 sentences2014The recrimination doctrine is- explained in Mason v. Mason, 276 Ala. 265, 267 , 160 So.2d 881, 882 (1964), as follows: “ ‘The rule is that if the conduct of both parties has been such as to furnish grounds for divorce, neither is entitled to relief, or, as otherwise expressed, if both parties have a right to a divorce, neither of the parties has.’” (Quoting Bryan v. Bryan, 271 Ala. 625, 627 , 126 So.2d 484, 485 (1961).) In 1971, our legislature amended the statutes governing grounds for divorce to include “incompatibility of temperament” and “an irretrievable breakdown of the marriage.” § 30-2 2014The recrimination doctrine is- explained in Mason v. Mason, 276 Ala. 265, 267 , 160 So.2d 881, 882 (1964), as follows: “ ‘The rule is that if the conduct of both parties has been such as to furnish grounds for divorce, neither is entitled to relief, or, as otherwise expressed, if both parties have a right to a divorce, neither of the parties has.’” (Quoting Bryan v. Bryan, 271 Ala. 625, 627 , 126 So.2d 484, 485 (1961).) In 1971, our legislature amended the statutes governing grounds for divorce to include “incompatibility of temperament” and “an irretrievable breakdown of the marriage.” § 30-2 | 1 | 2 |
Mason v. Masongreen2 sentences2014The recrimination doctrine is- explained in Mason v. Mason, 276 Ala. 265, 267 , 160 So.2d 881, 882 (1964), as follows: “ ‘The rule is that if the conduct of both parties has been such as to furnish grounds for divorce, neither is entitled to relief, or, as otherwise expressed, if both parties have a right to a divorce, neither of the parties has.’” (Quoting Bryan v. Bryan, 271 Ala. 625, 627 , 126 So.2d 484, 485 (1961).) In 1971, our legislature amended the statutes governing grounds for divorce to include “incompatibility of temperament” and “an irretrievable breakdown of the marriage.” § 30-2 2014The recrimination doctrine is- explained in Mason v. Mason, 276 Ala. 265, 267 , 160 So.2d 881, 882 (1964), as follows: “ ‘The rule is that if the conduct of both parties has been such as to furnish grounds for divorce, neither is entitled to relief, or, as otherwise expressed, if both parties have a right to a divorce, neither of the parties has.’” (Quoting Bryan v. Bryan, 271 Ala. 625, 627 , 126 So.2d 484, 485 (1961).) In 1971, our legislature amended the statutes governing grounds for divorce to include “incompatibility of temperament” and “an irretrievable breakdown of the marriage.” § 30-2 | 1 | 1 |
Dale v. Dalegreen2 sentences2014I concur in the result as to Part III of the main opinion on the authority of Dale v. Dale, 54 Ala.App. 505, 509 , 310 So.2d 225, 229 (Civ.App.1975), which bars application of the recrimination doctrine in favor of an adulterous spouse in the absence of evidence corroborating the other spouse’s confession of adultery. 2014I concur in the result as to Part III of the main opinion on the authority of Dale v. Dale, 54 Ala.App. 505, 509 , 310 So.2d 225, 229 (Civ.App.1975), which bars application of the recrimination doctrine in favor of an adulterous spouse in the absence of evidence corroborating the other spouse’s confession of adultery. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Alabama. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Colotti v. Colotti
neutral
2 sentences1976The doctrine of recrimination in Alabama is of statutory origin, Colotti v. Colotti, 280 Ala. 525 , 196 So.2d 375 . 1976The doctrine of recrimination in Alabama is of statutory origin, Colotti v. Colotti, 280 Ala. 525 , 196 So.2d 375 . | 2 | 1972–1976 |
Richardson v. Richardson
green
2 sentences1976In 1837 the case of Richardson v. Richardson, 4 Port. 467 , 30 Am.Dec. 538, held that the 1824 statute did not recognize desertion as a proper basis for a recrimination defense to divorce sought on ground of adultery. 1976In 1837 the case of Richardson v. Richardson, 4 Port. 467 , 30 Am.Dec. 538, held that the 1824 statute did not recognize desertion as a proper basis for a recrimination defense to divorce sought on ground of adultery. | 1 | 1976–1976 |
Sitterson v. . Sitterson
green
2 sentences1967Herrick v. Herrick, 55 Nev. 59 , 25 P.2d 378 ; especially as to the ground of separation for a stated term of years, Sitterson v. Sitterson, 191 N.C. 319 , 131 S.E. 641 , 51 A.L.R. 760 . 1967Herrick v. Herrick, 55 Nev. 59 , 25 P.2d 378 ; especially as to the ground of separation for a stated term of years, Sitterson v. Sitterson, 191 N.C. 319 , 131 S.E. 641 , 51 A.L.R. 760 . | 1 | 1967–1967 |
Burdette v. Burdette
green
2 sentences1967The burden was on the husband, ■appellee, to prove the ground of divorce alleged in his cross-bill by competent and legal evidence (Burdette v. Burdette, 245 Ala. 26 , 15 So.2d 727 ; Pittman v. Pittman, 246 Ala. 163 , 19 So.2d 723 ; Hendrix v. Hendrix, 250 Ala. 309 , 34 So.2d 214 ) and ■as to the specific ground alleged, adultery, the proof must be such as to create more than a mere suspicion, but be sufficient to lead the guarded discretion of a reasonable and just mind to the conclusion of adultery as a necessary inference Hendrix v. Hendrix, supra; Brown v. Brown, 229 Ala. 471 , 158 So. 311 1967The burden was on the husband, ■appellee, to prove the ground of divorce alleged in his cross-bill by competent and legal evidence (Burdette v. Burdette, 245 Ala. 26 , 15 So.2d 727 ; Pittman v. Pittman, 246 Ala. 163 , 19 So.2d 723 ; Hendrix v. Hendrix, 250 Ala. 309 , 34 So.2d 214 ) and ■as to the specific ground alleged, adultery, the proof must be such as to create more than a mere suspicion, but be sufficient to lead the guarded discretion of a reasonable and just mind to the conclusion of adultery as a necessary inference Hendrix v. Hendrix, supra; Brown v. Brown, 229 Ala. 471 , 158 So. 311 | 1 | 1967–1967 |
Hendrix v. Hendrix
green
2 sentences1967The burden was on the husband, ■appellee, to prove the ground of divorce alleged in his cross-bill by competent and legal evidence (Burdette v. Burdette, 245 Ala. 26 , 15 So.2d 727 ; Pittman v. Pittman, 246 Ala. 163 , 19 So.2d 723 ; Hendrix v. Hendrix, 250 Ala. 309 , 34 So.2d 214 ) and ■as to the specific ground alleged, adultery, the proof must be such as to create more than a mere suspicion, but be sufficient to lead the guarded discretion of a reasonable and just mind to the conclusion of adultery as a necessary inference Hendrix v. Hendrix, supra; Brown v. Brown, 229 Ala. 471 , 158 So. 311 1967The burden was on the husband, ■appellee, to prove the ground of divorce alleged in his cross-bill by competent and legal evidence (Burdette v. Burdette, 245 Ala. 26 , 15 So.2d 727 ; Pittman v. Pittman, 246 Ala. 163 , 19 So.2d 723 ; Hendrix v. Hendrix, 250 Ala. 309 , 34 So.2d 214 ) and ■as to the specific ground alleged, adultery, the proof must be such as to create more than a mere suspicion, but be sufficient to lead the guarded discretion of a reasonable and just mind to the conclusion of adultery as a necessary inference Hendrix v. Hendrix, supra; Brown v. Brown, 229 Ala. 471 , 158 So. 311 | 1 | 1967–1967 |
Pittman v. Pittman
neutral
2 sentences1967The burden was on the husband, ■appellee, to prove the ground of divorce alleged in his cross-bill by competent and legal evidence (Burdette v. Burdette, 245 Ala. 26 , 15 So.2d 727 ; Pittman v. Pittman, 246 Ala. 163 , 19 So.2d 723 ; Hendrix v. Hendrix, 250 Ala. 309 , 34 So.2d 214 ) and ■as to the specific ground alleged, adultery, the proof must be such as to create more than a mere suspicion, but be sufficient to lead the guarded discretion of a reasonable and just mind to the conclusion of adultery as a necessary inference Hendrix v. Hendrix, supra; Brown v. Brown, 229 Ala. 471 , 158 So. 311 1967The burden was on the husband, ■appellee, to prove the ground of divorce alleged in his cross-bill by competent and legal evidence (Burdette v. Burdette, 245 Ala. 26 , 15 So.2d 727 ; Pittman v. Pittman, 246 Ala. 163 , 19 So.2d 723 ; Hendrix v. Hendrix, 250 Ala. 309 , 34 So.2d 214 ) and ■as to the specific ground alleged, adultery, the proof must be such as to create more than a mere suspicion, but be sufficient to lead the guarded discretion of a reasonable and just mind to the conclusion of adultery as a necessary inference Hendrix v. Hendrix, supra; Brown v. Brown, 229 Ala. 471 , 158 So. 311 | 1 | 1967–1967 |
Pitchford v. Pitchford
neutral
2 sentences1967The burden was on the husband, ■appellee, to prove the ground of divorce alleged in his cross-bill by competent and legal evidence (Burdette v. Burdette, 245 Ala. 26 , 15 So.2d 727 ; Pittman v. Pittman, 246 Ala. 163 , 19 So.2d 723 ; Hendrix v. Hendrix, 250 Ala. 309 , 34 So.2d 214 ) and ■as to the specific ground alleged, adultery, the proof must be such as to create more than a mere suspicion, but be sufficient to lead the guarded discretion of a reasonable and just mind to the conclusion of adultery as a necessary inference Hendrix v. Hendrix, supra; Brown v. Brown, 229 Ala. 471 , 158 So. 311 1967The burden was on the husband, ■appellee, to prove the ground of divorce alleged in his cross-bill by competent and legal evidence (Burdette v. Burdette, 245 Ala. 26 , 15 So.2d 727 ; Pittman v. Pittman, 246 Ala. 163 , 19 So.2d 723 ; Hendrix v. Hendrix, 250 Ala. 309 , 34 So.2d 214 ) and ■as to the specific ground alleged, adultery, the proof must be such as to create more than a mere suspicion, but be sufficient to lead the guarded discretion of a reasonable and just mind to the conclusion of adultery as a necessary inference Hendrix v. Hendrix, supra; Brown v. Brown, 229 Ala. 471 , 158 So. 311 | 1 | 1967–1967 |
Brown v. Brown
neutral
2 sentences1967The burden was on the husband, ■appellee, to prove the ground of divorce alleged in his cross-bill by competent and legal evidence (Burdette v. Burdette, 245 Ala. 26 , 15 So.2d 727 ; Pittman v. Pittman, 246 Ala. 163 , 19 So.2d 723 ; Hendrix v. Hendrix, 250 Ala. 309 , 34 So.2d 214 ) and ■as to the specific ground alleged, adultery, the proof must be such as to create more than a mere suspicion, but be sufficient to lead the guarded discretion of a reasonable and just mind to the conclusion of adultery as a necessary inference Hendrix v. Hendrix, supra; Brown v. Brown, 229 Ala. 471 , 158 So. 311 1967The burden was on the husband, ■appellee, to prove the ground of divorce alleged in his cross-bill by competent and legal evidence (Burdette v. Burdette, 245 Ala. 26 , 15 So.2d 727 ; Pittman v. Pittman, 246 Ala. 163 , 19 So.2d 723 ; Hendrix v. Hendrix, 250 Ala. 309 , 34 So.2d 214 ) and ■as to the specific ground alleged, adultery, the proof must be such as to create more than a mere suspicion, but be sufficient to lead the guarded discretion of a reasonable and just mind to the conclusion of adultery as a necessary inference Hendrix v. Hendrix, supra; Brown v. Brown, 229 Ala. 471 , 158 So. 311 | 1 | 1967–1967 |
Herrick v. Herrick
green
2 sentences1967Herrick v. Herrick, 55 Nev. 59 , 25 P.2d 378 ; especially as to the ground of separation for a stated term of years, Sitterson v. Sitterson, 191 N.C. 319 , 131 S.E. 641 , 51 A.L.R. 760 . 1967Herrick v. Herrick, 55 Nev. 59 , 25 P.2d 378 ; especially as to the ground of separation for a stated term of years, Sitterson v. Sitterson, 191 N.C. 319 , 131 S.E. 641 , 51 A.L.R. 760 . | 1 | 1967–1967 |
White v. White
green
2 sentences1967The burden was on the husband, ■appellee, to prove the ground of divorce alleged in his cross-bill by competent and legal evidence (Burdette v. Burdette, 245 Ala. 26 , 15 So.2d 727 ; Pittman v. Pittman, 246 Ala. 163 , 19 So.2d 723 ; Hendrix v. Hendrix, 250 Ala. 309 , 34 So.2d 214 ) and ■as to the specific ground alleged, adultery, the proof must be such as to create more than a mere suspicion, but be sufficient to lead the guarded discretion of a reasonable and just mind to the conclusion of adultery as a necessary inference Hendrix v. Hendrix, supra; Brown v. Brown, 229 Ala. 471 , 158 So. 311 1967The burden was on the husband, ■appellee, to prove the ground of divorce alleged in his cross-bill by competent and legal evidence (Burdette v. Burdette, 245 Ala. 26 , 15 So.2d 727 ; Pittman v. Pittman, 246 Ala. 163 , 19 So.2d 723 ; Hendrix v. Hendrix, 250 Ala. 309 , 34 So.2d 214 ) and ■as to the specific ground alleged, adultery, the proof must be such as to create more than a mere suspicion, but be sufficient to lead the guarded discretion of a reasonable and just mind to the conclusion of adultery as a necessary inference Hendrix v. Hendrix, supra; Brown v. Brown, 229 Ala. 471 , 158 So. 311 | 1 | 1967–1967 |
Sessoms Grocery Co. v. International Sugar Feed Co.
neutral
2 sentences1930Brindley v. Brindley, 121 Ala. 429 , 431 , 25 So. 751 ; Jones v. Jones, 189 Ala. 286 , 288 , 66 So. 4 ; Sessoms Grocery Co. v. International Sugar Feed Co., 188 Ala. 232 , 235 , 66 So. 479 ; 19 C.J. 93, § 219. 1930Brindley v. Brindley, 121 Ala. 429 , 431 , 25 So. 751 ; Jones v. Jones, 189 Ala. 286 , 288 , 66 So. 4 ; Sessoms Grocery Co. v. International Sugar Feed Co., 188 Ala. 232 , 235 , 66 So. 479 ; 19 C.J. 93, § 219. | 1 | 1930–1930 |
Jones v. Jones
neutral
2 sentences1930Brindley v. Brindley, 121 Ala. 429 , 431 , 25 So. 751 ; Jones v. Jones, 189 Ala. 286 , 288 , 66 So. 4 ; Sessoms Grocery Co. v. International Sugar Feed Co., 188 Ala. 232 , 235 , 66 So. 479 ; 19 C.J. 93, § 219. 1930Brindley v. Brindley, 121 Ala. 429 , 431 , 25 So. 751 ; Jones v. Jones, 189 Ala. 286 , 288 , 66 So. 4 ; Sessoms Grocery Co. v. International Sugar Feed Co., 188 Ala. 232 , 235 , 66 So. 479 ; 19 C.J. 93, § 219. | 1 | 1930–1930 |
Brindley v. Brindley
green
1 sentence1930Brindley v. Brindley, 121 Ala. 429 , 431 , 25 So. 751 ; Jones v. Jones, 189 Ala. 286 , 288 , 66 So. 4 ; Sessoms Grocery Co. v. International Sugar Feed Co., 188 Ala. 232 , 235 , 66 So. 479 ; 19 C.J. 93, § 219. | 1 | 1930–1930 |
King v. King
green
1 sentence1857They show much impropriety of language on the part of the complainant, and the indulgence of some bad temper and jealousy ; but certainly these faults, as set forth in the letters, are not such as will justify or excuse a desertion on the part of her husband, even under the most extensive import allowed in any of the cases to the doctrine of recrimination. — King v. King, 28 Ala. 315 ; Gray v. Gray, 15 Ala. 785 ; Jones v. Jones, 13 Ala. 147 ; Bishop on M. & D. § 524-6. | 1 | 1857–1857 |
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.