Thanks for visiting! Welcome to a new way to research case law. You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation and good law / bad law checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.
Wood v. Wood
Citations: 232 Ark. 812; 340 S.W.2d 393; 1960 Ark. LEXIS 498Docket: 5-2237
Court: Supreme Court of Arkansas; November 28, 1960; Arkansas; State Supreme Court
Dr. Wood was granted an absolute divorce by the Chancery Court, prompting Mrs. Wood to appeal on two grounds: (1) the trial court erred by denying her the right to participate in the trial, and (2) the decree lacked corroborative evidence to support the divorce claim. The court prioritized the second point, emphasizing the necessity of corroboration in divorce cases under Arkansas law, citing several precedents. Dr. Wood's claim for divorce was based on living separately for three years, but the evidence presented was insufficient. Only two witnesses testified: the Chancery Court Clerk, whose testimony pertained to procedural matters and did not substantiate Dr. Wood's claims, and Dr. Wood himself. The only corroborative evidence was an ex parte affidavit from William Harris, which the court noted could not serve as independent evidence. Previous case law clearly established that affidavits alone cannot corroborate testimony in divorce proceedings. The court found that the Chancery Court had erred by basing its decree solely on inadequate evidence, leading to the reversal of the divorce decree and annulment of the divorce. The Chancery Court was directed to dismiss the case without prejudice, allowing either party the opportunity to initiate a new case if desired. All costs were assessed against Dr. Wood. Justice George Rose Smith did not participate in the decision.