While the absence of witnesses other than the plaintiff in an action for divorce does not necessarily preclude the plaintiff's right to a decree, it is always an important consideration. The plaintiff, in an action for divorce on the ground of intolerable cruelty, failed to sustain the burden of proof. Her petition was, accordingly, dismissed. The plaintiff and the defendant had not resided in Connecticut for three years. The plaintiff relied on that provision of the statute which permits one to seek a decree where the cause of the divorce arises subsequent to the removal into this State. The cumulative effect of the claimed acts of intolerable cruelty was based on events that occurred both before and after the parties came to Connecticut. The court was doubtful whether the facts brought the plaintiff within the statute.
O'SULLIVAN, J.
The only witness presented by the plaintiff in support of her case was herself. The absence of other witnesses does not necessarily preclude one's right to a decree but it is always an important consideration. At any rate, in this case, it has real significance because, without some corroboration, the plaintiff has failed to sustain the burden of proof.
In addition to this, there is grave doubt in my mind that the court has jurisdiction. The plaintiff and the defendant have not resided for three years in Connecticut. The former relies on that provision of the statute which permits one to seek a decree where the cause of the divorce arises subsequent to the removal into the State.