SUPREME COURT

Dominion, Volume 7, Issue 2238, 26 August 1914, Page 9

SUPREME COURT

DIVORCE PETITIONS. Several undefended divorce cases were heard in the Supreme Court yesterday morning before His Honour Mr. Justice Hosking. Osborne v. Osborne. Alfred Ernest Osborne, for whom Mr. H. F. Von Haast appeared, petitioned for dissolution of his marriage with Annie, Maria Oshorne on tho ground of her misconduct with one Charles Campbell. On behalf of tho petitioner, it was stated that tho parties were married in England on June 1, 1907, and that on January 9, 1909, the petitioner left the Old Country to settlo in Christchurch. Ho subsequently -wrote to his wife asking her to come out to New Zealand and join him, but she did not comply with his request. Instead she wrote a letter containing an admission of adultery. His Honour adjourned the case, until 10.80 a.m. to-day in order that he might consider certain legal phases of the petition. Fenton v. Fenton. Desertion was the ground on which Jessie Fenton sued for divorce from John Fenton. Mr. T. E. Maunsell, who appeared for the petitioner, called evidenco to show that tho parties were married in Wellington 19 years ago, and that the respondent had deserted his wife on April 1, 1909, and had since failed to contribute anything towards tho support of herself and her two children. He was now living in Adelaide. His Honour granted a decree nisi, to be made absolute in four months. Phillipson v. Phillipson. Rachell Isabella Phillipson (Mr. T. M. Wilfqrd) sought divorce from Ralph Phillipson on the ground of desertion. The parties were married in Yorkshire on October 26, 1836, and came to New Zealand nine years ago. In January, 1909, respondent deserted his wife, and had since failed to maintain her and the children of the marriage. A decree nisi was granted, to be made absolutein three months. Nicholl v. Nicholl. Petitioner in the case of Frances Louise Nicholl v. Cecil Constantine Nicholl raised the grounds of misconduct and failure to maintain in support of her suit for divorce. The parties were married on January 17, 1907, and were separated by an order of the Magistrate's Court (granted on the wife's application) on May 11, 1908. Since October, 1908, the respondent had not complied with an order for the mainteriance of his wife. He was, now a resident of Sydney. A decree nisi was granted, to be made absolute at the expiration of four months. Mr. H, F. O'Leary appeared for the petitioner. M'Lean v. M'Lean. Gladys Ellen M'Lean, wlio was represented by Mr. D. S. Smith, prayed for dissolution of her marriage with Alexander M'Lean on -the ground of; desertion, the respondent not having lived with her since 1908, and haying failed to make adequate provision for the support of his wife and the child of the marriage.- His Honour granted a decree nisi, to be made absolute in three months, the petitioner to havo interimoustody of the child. Greening v. Greening. A decree nisi, to be made absolute in three months, was-also granted in" the case of Catherine Ellis* Greening y,William Henry Greening", Mr. T. M. Wilford, who appeared for the petitioner, called evidence to show that the parties wero married at Petone on .November 2, 1906, and lived there until February, 1913, when the respondent admitted being guilty, of _ uiiscondniot with another woman not cited in the petition. Aislabie v. Aislabie. In the case of Annie Virginia Rayner, Aislabie v. William Rawson Aislabie, the petitioner was granted a decree nisi on the ground of respondent's misconduct with a woman named Nellie Livingatone. The marriage took place at Auckland ou March 19,1002, and the parties lived together at different places in Now Zealand tad Australia until last year, when the rtttitkner left her husband oi. account of hia mifltoTifet. Mr. Q. H, Fell appeared for- the petitioner yesterday. . O'Kelly v. O'Kelly. The divorce case of Lindo O'Kelly v. Edward O'Kelly was yestorday. set', down for hearing or Friday next. ' •