AMERICAN

LAW REPORTS

ANNOTATED

VOL. 6

EVA FINCH

V.

HARVEY V. FINCH, Appt..

New Jersey Court of Errors and Appeals - November 18, 1918.

Husband and wife

-

(89 N. J. Eq. 563, 105 Atl. 205.)

nonsupport

excuse.

The husband offered no defense to the charge of abandonment and nonsupport of his wife, but pleaded that having given her, when he left her, two out of four bank books, representing substantially the savings of the wife and gifts to her from her mother, he had fulfilled his marital duty of support. Held, that if the moneys represented by the books were his, he had made a gift of it to his wife. Held also, that his duty to support his wife was not, after the expiration of two years of continuous neglect upon his part, fulfilled by such gift.

[See note on this question beginning on page 6.]

Headnote by MINTURN, J.

APPEAL by defendant from a decree of the Court of Chancery in favor of complainant in a suit for alimony. Affirmed. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court. Mr. Charles E. S. Simpson for appellant.

Messrs. Albert Leuly and William C. Asper, for appellee:

Defendant abandoned and separated himself from his wife without justifiable cause.

Bradbury v. Bradbury, N. J. Eq. -, 74 Atl. 150.

Defendant refused and neglected to maintain and provide for his wife. Beck v. Beck, 78 N. J. Eq. 544, 35 6 A.L.R.-1.

L.R.A. (N.S.) 712, 80 Atl. 550; Bacon v. Devinney, 55 N. J. Eq. 449, 37 Atl. 144; 21 Cyc. 1296; Westerfield v. Westerfield, 36 N. J. Eq. 195.

Minturn, J., delivered the opinion of the court:

There was no defense interposed by the husband to this suit for alimony by the wife, and the legal correctness of the vice chancellor's decree depends upon the answer to the