Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

YORSTON DIVORCE CASE

EBTEIAL COMMENCED. In the .Supreme Court yesterday, before His Honour Mr. Justice Hoskiug and a jury of twelve, the retrial' of the divorce suit brought by- JohnYorston, of Wellington, clerk in the .Railway Department (Mr. P. W. Jackson) against Ida i May Yorston (Mr. H. V. O'U'ary), was " commenced. The grounds of the petition were that in March, 1917, when the parties were living at Makutuku, llnwke's . Bay, the respondent deserted' her husband,' and never returned to him. It was alleged further in support of the petitioner, that she wrote to him staying that she had absolutely finished with him, and did not intend 'to return to • •" For the defence it was contended that there was no desertion. Iu support ot this, Mr. O'Leary - adduced evidence to show that when the petitioner was transferred to Wellington, It was as a replevin* officer, which meant that he would be° shifted about from office to oflice, and therefore would be . unable to set . up a homo. It was at Yoreton's desire that the respondent went to live with her nnele at Featherston. Counsel pmdueeti: many letters signed by one ""Yvonne,"-which, be submitted, went to show that the petitioner had commenced . an intrigue with another girl, and' con- | sequently did not want his wife.with | . him The letter produced by petitioner , in support of his case was admitted, but Mr. O'Leary said that it was petitioners conduct, iu connection with the other girl, which, was! -responsible-for that . e Thc proceedings wH I,e «°ntinucd at 10.30 to-day. . ,• ' T it, The case-was first heard m June last ■ by Mr. Justice Edwards, wbo, at the conclusion of the petitioner's case, directed the jury that there was no. evidence of desertion, and to return a verdict ac- - r-ordinely, which they did. • Subsequently Mr. Jack€on applied to the Supreme Court (three Judges) for a new trial on, the ground of misdirection and wrong- ' ful exclusion of■ evidence: The present hearing is the result of that application.

Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/DOM19201119.2.6

Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka

Dominion, Volume 14, Issue 47, 19 November 1920, Page 3

Word count
Tapeke kupu
330

YORSTON DIVORCE CASE Dominion, Volume 14, Issue 47, 19 November 1920, Page 3

YORSTON DIVORCE CASE Dominion, Volume 14, Issue 47, 19 November 1920, Page 3

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert