Although Maryland allows “no-fault” divorces based on mutual consent or living separately for at least 12 months, the law continues to recognize numerous fault-based grounds for obtaining a divorce, as well. One such ground is “cruelty of treatment.”

Historically, cruelty of treatment referred to one spouse committing acts of physical violence against the other. In more recent times, Maryland courts have recognized that verbal and psychological abuse can be just as damaging, if not more so, than physical violence. Indeed, the Maryland Court of Special Appeals held earlier this year that a divorce may be granted on cruelty grounds when the evidence shows that one spouse has used verbal and psychological abuse with the intent to “seriously impair the health or permanently destroy the happiness of the other” spouse.

Court of Special Appeals Explains Evolving Standards of Cruelty

The case before the Court of Special Appeals, Frazelle-Foster v. Foster, involved a couple who initially married in 1982. They divorced in 1988 but remarried in 1991. In 2017, the wife filed for a second divorce on the grounds of cruelty of treatment and constructive desertion. With respect to the former, the wife alleged that the husband had “persistently engaged in cruelty of treatment” that endangered her “safety, health, and happiness.” More precisely, she said the husband had “verbally abused, harassed and humiliated her on numerous occasions.”

After a bench trial, the judge denied the wife’s request for divorce on grounds of cruelty. The judge said that aside from a single letter, the wife failed to produce any evidence of a “continuing behavior or pattern” of cruelty by the husband throughout the marriage. The wife appealed the judge’s decision.

In its own opinion, the Court of Special Appeals noted that cruelty was not considered a grounds for absolute divorce in Maryland until 1998, when the General Assembly added it in response to “public alarm over the prevalence of domestic violence.” (Previously, it was grounds only for limited divorce.) Going further back, Maryland courts typically only considered “serious, continuous corroborated physical abuse” as sufficient proof of cruel treatment.

In the 21st century, the Court of Special Appeals said, physical violence was no longer considered “essential to constitute cruelty of treatment.” There are situations where “emotional abuse, psychological abuse, and other coercive and controlling behaviors,” may be considered cruelty for purposes of obtaining a limited or absolute divorce.

With respect to the case before the Court, it was not clear whether or not the trial judge “failed to consider [the wife’s] testimony describing ongoing verbal and psychological abuse inflicted on her by [the husband]” at the original trial. But the trial court did err in applying the older, stricter standard of cruelty of treatment, and that alone justified returning the case for further proceedings.

Contact Bowie, Maryland, Family Law Attorney Robert Castro Today

This article has been provided by the Law Office of Robert Castro. For more information or questions contact our office to speak to an experienced lawyer at (301) 870-1200.

Source:

https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=6282351775870219162