She claims specifically that the mere uncorroborated testimony of one spouse does not constitute the preponderance of the evidence required by law to support a judgment of separation or divorce. In support of her position, she cites several cases, including Gilberti v. Gilberti, 338 So.2d 971 (La.App. 4th Cir. 1976); Johnson v. Johnson, 296 So.2d 470 (La.App. 2d Cir. 1974); Meyerer v. Meyerer 255 So.2d 367 (La.App. 1st Cir. 1971); Mason v. Mason, 155 So.2d 216 (La.App. 2d Cir. 1963); and Ellois v. Ellois, 145 So.2d 123 (La.App. 4th Cir. 1962). In a separation case the plaintiff bears the burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence the facts in support of his demand.
A spouse seeking a separation from bed and board must prove his right to the separation by a preponderance of the evidence. Johnson v. Johnson, 296 So.2d 470 (La.App. 2nd Cir. 1974) writ denied 300 So.2d 183 (La.). Meyerer v. Meyerer, 255 So.2d 367 (La.App. 1st Cir. 1971), Ellois v. Ellois, 145 So.2d 123 (La.App. 4th Cir. 1962). The uncorroborated testimony of one spouse is not sufficient to carry this burden of proof in the face of contradictory testimony by the other spouse when the credibility of neither is attacked.