Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges

MYRTLE K. VAN TASSELL, Respondent, v. ELLA HEIDT, Defendant; LAURA HEIDT, Administratrix, etc., et al., Appellants.

THE COURT. —

From the examination which the court has made of the entire record in this case, and dealing with the matter of the insufficiency of the evidence to justify the decision of the court, we are satisfied that the evidence is wholly insufficient to warrant the findings and decision of the trial court. This being an action against the parents of a young woman, who alone have appealed, for having alienated from his wife the affections of a man who had illicitly sought the regard of said daughter, the evidence does not show that the defendants in the action were ever guilty of conduct tending to alienate the affections of the husband from his wife so as to subject them to an action for damages. In other words, there is no sufficient evidence to support the findings and judgment of the trial court in so far as the appellants, the father and mother, are concerned. That being so — and without reference to the question of the error which the court made in the admission of hearsay evidence, which seems to have been repeated, but which may not have been sufficiently objected to — we think that the judgment against the appellants ought to be reversed, and it is so ordered.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

VAN TASSELL v. HEIDT
(Mar 15, 1917)