Diemer v. Diemer

8 N.Y.2d 206, 203 N.Y.S.2d 829, 168 N.E.2d 654 (1960)

From our private database of 46,300+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Diemer v. Diemer

New York Court of Appeals
8 N.Y.2d 206, 203 N.Y.S.2d 829, 168 N.E.2d 654 (1960)

Facts

William Diemer (husband) (plaintiff) was Protestant; Gilberte Diemer (wife) (defendant) was Roman Catholic. Before marrying, the husband and wife agreed that the husband’s faith would be her faith, and the Diemers were married in a Protestant church. Several years later, the wife began to feel more strongly about being Catholic, and she came to believe that her marriage to the husband was invalid in the eyes of the Catholic Church. Based on this view, the wife told the husband that she would not have sex with him unless and until they remarried in a Catholic church. Over the next several months, the husband sought to change the wife’s mind, but the wife continued to refuse to have sex with him. The husband ultimately left the marital home and sued the wife seeking legal separation and custody of the couple’s daughter. Per the husband, the requested relief was warranted by the wife’s alleged cruel and inhuman treatment, which had caused him to suffer and seriously impaired his physical and mental well-being. The husband did not contend that the wife had abandoned him. The wife counterclaimed for separation, support, and custody. However, the wife conceded that she had refused to have sex with the husband unless and until the couple remarried in a Catholic church. The trial court denied both the husband’s and the wife’s requests for a separation and awarded custody to the wife. The trial court reasoned that the wife had not engaged in cruel and inhuman treatment because she had not willfully and deliberately intended to harm the husband and because the husband had not suffered any actual health damage. The appellate division affirmed. The husband appealed.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Fuld, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 806,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 806,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 806,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,300 briefs - keyed to 988 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership