Opinion
01-30-1906
SNEDAKER v. SNEDAKER.
Alfred F. Stevens, for petitioner.
Suit for divorce by one Snedaker. Confirmation of master's report in favor of plaintiff denied.
Alfred F. Stevens, for petitioner.
MAGIE, Ch. Having doubted whether the report in favor of the relief sought by this petition was supported by the evidence, I have heard counsel, and reconsidered the proofs. The petitioner's evidence as to the circumstances under which defendant left her is wholly uncorroborated. She states, however, that he told her he was going to Far Rockaway to get work, and promised to send for her when he got work. If her uncorroborated evidence be given probative force, it indicates no then existing intent on the part of the defendant to desert his wife. The proof that he afterward procured remunerative work and failed to send for her will not establish a desertion at the time of such breach of his promise, because the evidence of his promise depends upon her uncorroborated evidence, and the sole proof that defendant obtained remunerative employment fixes the date as about September, 1903. If from that it can be inferred that he then intended to abandon his wife, the period fixed by the statute had not expired when this petition was filed, on May 22, 1905.
The master's report cannot be confirmed.