KEMPSKI v. KEMPSKI

DIVORCE, § 92 — insufficiency of instructions as to extreme and repeated cruelty. In wife's action for divorce on ground of extreme and repeated cruelty, defendant's erroneous instructions on preponderance of evidence, which were confusing to jury and failed to define what cause or provocation by plaintiff would justify defendant's alleged acts of cruelty, together with other erroneous and misleading instructions, required new trial.

Opinion by JUSTICE BURKE.

Not to be published in full. Opinion filed February 4, 1948; released for publication February 20, 1948.