(DOWNLOAD) "John L. Ballou v. Bessie B. Ballou" by Supreme Court of New Hampshire # eBook PDF Kindle ePub Free
eBook details
- Title: John L. Ballou v. Bessie B. Ballou
- Author : Supreme Court of New Hampshire
- Release Date : January 06, 1948
- Genre: Law,Books,Professional & Technical,
- Pages : * pages
- Size : 55 KB
Description
The record discloses a turbulent and stormy marriage career of several years duration accompanied by assaults, threats and unfounded accusations. Although the evidence is otherwise conflicting and contradictory, the parties concede and the record demonstrates that a reconciliation was hopeless. The Trial Court heard and observed the parties and their witnesses and was in a better position to Judge their credibility than an appellate court which reads about it. In domestic relation cases testimony of the parties may be unconsciously colored by emotion and consciously slanted by vindictiveness. To distinguish fact from assertion frequently requires the delphic powers of a judicial Solomon and the attainment of that objective should not be unduly diluted in the process of appellate review. The Trial Judge could disbelieve the libelant's testimony, believe the libelee's, and enter the decree which he did. Franklyn v. Franklyn, 93 N.H. 90. The ""dismissal of the libel... included a finding that the plaintiff had not sustained his burden of proof."" Beasley v. Beasley, 93 N.H. 447, 448. ""Nevertheless we have satisfied ourselves that all the material findings objected to were amply sustained by the testimony, provided it be conceded, as it must be, that the trier of the fact may determine which of conflicting testimony is credible... and that he may draw inferences as to human feelings and motives after hearing the witness testify."" Dubreuil v. Dubreuil, 93 N.H. 14, 15. This does not mean that the Trial Court's discretion is completely unfettered (R. L., c. 369, s. 2) but it does mean that its findings are binding where ""there is evidence to support them."" Cote v. Cote, 94 N.H. 372, 373; Johnson v. Johnson, 80 N.H. 15. In the future as in the past errors and abuses will be corrected. A finding that ""is contrary to all the evidence"" will be set aside. Pflug v. Pflug, 92 N.H. 247, 248. Likewise unwarranted and prejudicial use of evidence by the Trial Justice which denies a party a fair trial constitutes reversible error. Kennard v. Kennard, 87 N.H. 320. In the present case no such errors appear and the finding and decree were warranted by the evidence.