Klemmer

The application for a hearing in this court, after decision by the district court of appeal of the first appellate district, division two, is denied.

In denying the application we withhold our approval from that portion of the opinion dealing with the question of the admissibility of the deposition of one “E- M-” referred to therein. The determination of this question is not essential to the reversal of the judgment.

All the Justices concurred, except Olney, J., who was absent.

The defendant appeals from an interlocutory decree of divorce.

The parties were married in 1906. In 1911 the husband sued for divorce upon the ground of desertion. She answered, resisting the divorce, and in a cross-complaint for separate maintenance alleged cruelty, failure of support, and desertion on the part of the husband. In that suit the husband was denied divorce. The judgment, among other things, determined the fact of the husband’s desertion in 1911, and allowed the wife $50 per month for the support of herself and her minor daughter, whose custody and control were awarded to the wife. The judgment was entered in June, 1912. From 1910 to 1913 the plaintiff did not see his wife.

In August, 1913, with his mother, the plaintiff arranged for his wife to meet him at the Hotel Sutter in San Francisco. In addition to that of the plaintiff and his wife, the only testimony given concerning this meeting was by the *621 plaintiff’s father. There was other evidence of demonstrative character contained in the letters, written after the meeting, from the plaintiff to the defendant. It is in opposition to the plaintiff’s oral testimony that his wife then refused to return to…

[EDITORS' NOTE: THIS PAGE CONTAINS HEADNOTES. HEADNOTES ARE NOT AN OFFICIAL PRODUCT OF THE COURT, THEREFORE THEY ARE NOT DISPLAYED.] *Page 620 The defendant appeals from an interlocutory decree of divorce. The parties were married in 1906. In 1911 the husband sued for divorce upon the ground of desertion. She answered, resisting the divorce, and in a cross-complaint for separate maintenance alleged cruelty, failure of support, and desertion on the part of the husband. In that suit the husband was denied divorce. The judgment, among other things, determined the fact of the husband's desertion in 1911, and allowed the wife $50 per month for the support of herself and her minor daughter, whose custody and control were awarded to the wife. The judgment was entered in June, 1912. From 1910 to 1913 the plaintiff did not see his wife. In August, 1913, with his mother, the plaintiff arranged for his wife to meet him at the Hotel Sutter in San Francisco. In addition to that of the plaintiff and his wife, the only testimony given concerning this meeting was by the *Page 621 plaintiff's father. There was other evidence of demonstrative character contained in the letters, written after the…