Schofer v. Schofer

Collins, J., delivered the opinion of the Court. This is an appeal by Rose D. Schofer, appellant, from a decree of Circuit Court #2 of Baltimore City dismissing her bill of complaint against her husband, Meyer Schofer, appellee. She prayed a divorce a mensa et thoro; custody of their infant female children, one thirteen and the other eight years old; permanent alimony, support of their infant children; alimony pendente lite; counsel fee; and other and further relief. ⁵⁵¹ The parties to this suit were married in York, Pennsylvania, in 1930. Since that time they have resided in Baltimore.

The two children, born as a result of this marriage, reside with their parents in the same house. The parties have had more or less a turbulent married life, he accusing her at various times of intimacy with other men, and she claiming her husband has an ungovernable temper and has beaten her at various times. However, the parties lived together as man and wife in the same room until the night of April 5, 1947. The parties are of the Jewish faith.

During the Passover in April, 1947, the appellant claimed she had made great preparation for the observance of that season. On the first night of the Passover season, as had been the custom in the past, the husband spent the first evening with his father and mother and she and the children with her family. She claimed she had made extensive preparations for the evening meal on the second night when the customary ritual of the Seder is performed. She said she requested her husband to perform this ritual, which he refused to do, telling her is was necessary for him to make a business call.

When the husband left the house his wife insisted on going with him and got in the car and her husband drove to his parents’ home. After arriving there she said she proposed waiting for him in the car but the appellee attempted to forcibly eject her. He was unsuccessful and a fight resulted during which she says several blows were struck by each party. The appellant returned home on a streetcar.

She said he arrived home that evening, after she had retired, came to the bedroom which had been occupied by the parties previously, removed his clothing to another room, and slept there. She said he told her he wanted her to get a divorce, as he had done on previous occasions. She further said he stated he did not intend to live with her any longer. It is admitted by both parties to this suit that they have not lived together as man and wife since before that evening, although occupying different rooms in the same house. ⁵⁵² On the other hand, it appears that the husband is a hardworking, industrious man with an income of about $60.00 a week.

He gave his wife $45.00 a week to pay for the food for the table, the maid, and other household expenses. He paid the telephone bill, the gas bill, the mortgage interest, taxes, and any charge accounts which his wife made against him, and was therefore heavily in debt. The Chancellor found the wife was “a rather expensive girl”, wanted expensive things for her children and family and charged these to her husband and this had caused great friction in the family. As to the evening of April 5, 1947, the appellee testified his wife asked him that morning whether he would spend the second evening of the Passover season with his family, which he agreed to do.

He stated he arrived home from work about 6 P.M., found no one in the house, no preparation for the evening meal, and he waited until five minutes of seven. As he was leaving the house the appellant came in with the two children. He claimed she used foul language in the presence of the children and proceeded to prepare and serve dinner. During that meal he said the appellant continued to swear and curse and he finally left the table and announced he was going out.

The appellant got'in the automobile with him and he said when they arrived in front of his