NEVADA DIVORCE LAWS
"The History of Nevada," published in 1913, Sam P. Davis writes as
follows:
"The unenviable reputation, throughout the length and breadth of the
land, in regard to the divorce law, has heaped ignominy on the State
of Nevada. A few unscrupulous members of the legal fraternity, little
better than outcasts at home, have come to Reno and besmirched the
good name of a great State by their activity in converting into
pernicious channels a law originally intended to give relief to
mismated couples who could not travel the matrimonial highway in peace
and harmony.
"The divorce law of Nevada was enacted by the first territorial
legislative assembly in 1861. The law was good enough for Nevada and
gave general satisfaction until its exploitation for purely mercenary
motives began.
"Twenty-two States have practically the same divorce laws in force on
their statute books, with the exception of the provision regarding
residence. Until this year, Nevada required only six months'
residence, but that had to be clearly established before action for
dissolution of marriage could have any standing in the courts of the
state. The residence had to be absolute, without the lapse of a single
day except where good and sufficient reason could be shown, and to the
entire satisfaction of the trial court.
"Six months' residence was also necessary for citizenship in Nevada
and enabled a man to exercise all the rights of a citizen. Therefore,
it naturally follows, that he could prosecute a divorce, or any other
kind of a suit, in the State of which he was a citizen.
"In order that the reader may reach an intelligent understanding of
this much mooted question, the statute on divorce is quoted in full:
"Divorce from the bonds of matrimony may be obtained * * * for the
following causes:
"First--Impotency at the time of marriage, continuing to the time of
divorce.
"Second--Adultery, since marriage, remaining unforgiven.
"Third--Wilful desertion at any time; of either party by the other,
for a period of one year.
"Fourth--Conviction of a felony or infamous crime.
"Fifth--Habitual gross drunkenness since marriage, of either party,
which shall incapacitate him from contributing his or her share to the
support of the family.
"Sixth--Extreme cruelty in either of the parties.
"Seventh--Neglect of the husband for the period of one year, to
provide the common necessaries of life, when such neglect is not the
result of poverty on the part of the husband, which he could have
avoided in ordinary industry."
"As the law governing the term of residence, to acquire citizenship,
which obtained in Nevada for half a century without causing even
passing comment, has been taken advantage of for mere mercenary
motives, the unanimous verdict of a righteously indignant people went
forth that the law should be amended, in some way, to correct the
evil. Thus at the last session of the Legislature the time required to
obtain a residence before obtaining a divorce was changed from six
months to one year.
"If some sister States are stricken with remorse or find themselves in
a sudden paroxysm of virtuous indignation, let them pass a law and
enforce it, correcting the evils complained of at home, which will
keep their divorces from coming to Reno-Nevada does not want them. If
they persist in coming, let their home State enact a law which will
make a divorce decree obtained in Nevada, void and of no effect
whenever and wherever said divorcee sets foot within the borders of
the home State. When other States enact and rigidly enforce some such
drastic measure, the West will begin to have some regard for their
particular brand of virtue. Until then, the West may be pardoned for
believing that cant and hypocrisy often join hands with the lawless
element and make a grandstand play for political effect.
"Economic conditions in the West are vastly different from those in
the East. Nevada is a sparsely populated country, and it is not
considered to the interest of the State to hedge about too closely the
road which leads to citizenship. Anything which may have a tendency to
obstruct immigration or turn it in another direction, is conceded, in
this neck of the woods, to be unwise statesmanship. The State has a
vital interest in securing and holding as large a population as is
consistent with her rapidly increasing resources; always keeping
steadily in view the fact that none but desirable citizens are wanted.
If, however, the other kind come, as they sometime do, Nevada is ready
to cope with the situation, as many of that class can testify from
personal experience.
"Nevada is a veteran of the Civil War, having been organized as a
territory in 1861, and admitted as a State of this glorious Union in
1864. No soldier on the field of battle ever made a more gallant
defense of his country than did this "Battle Born" State during the
trying times of the war. What she lacked in men was made up in money.
Nevada was baptised in the blood of the nation and paid for her
baptismal rite in a flood of gold and silver. With this flood of gold
and silver, she saved the commercial honor of the country. This gold
and silver paid the armies of the Civil War, averted national
bankruptcy, and enabled the Government to resume specie payment in
1873.
"Those were dark days in the financial and political history of the
United States, and Nevada, maligned and despised as she is today in
some quarters, was the savior of her country in that most critical
period of her history. The State that furnished the sinews of war
should have some standing in the hearts and minds of the American
people, even if Republics are ungrateful.
"From the best information at hand, it would appear that the mines of
Nevada have yielded the enormous sum of two billion dollars during the
past fifty years. Of this amount it is conceded that the Comstock
alone produced fully one-half. The figures are given in round numbers,
but are considered by mining men who are posted in such matters to be
conservative. Thousands of discoveries, many of them marvelously rich,
are still being made all over the state, in hitherto unknown and
undeveloped territory. Besides gold, silver and copper, immense
deposits of salt, borax, lime, platinum, sulphur, soda, potash-salts,
cinnabar, arsenical ores, zinc, coal, antimony, cobalt, nickel, nitre,
isinglass, manganese, alum, kaolin, iron, gypsum, mica and graphite
exist in large quantities.
"Proudly conscious of her strength and probity of character, great
big-hearted Nevada looks down from her lofty pedestal and freely
pardons all who may have misjudged her. This is Nevada's record. Match
it, if you can.
"The impulse which inspires a desire for a dissolution of an
intolerable matrimonial alliance, is as fundamental to human nature as
the one which inspires a desire for marriage, and is oft times far
more moral. Therefore, to require the commission of immoral and
degrading acts on the part of one of the parties to a marriage before
a divorce can be granted, regardless of why it is desired, places an
unwarranted premium upon immorality, and degrades society equally as
much as it does the one committing the offense.
Not only does this policy of the law foster immorality, but immorality
increases in proportion as the law becomes more drastic. Surely, the
Nevada law is more moral than that of New York, which permits divorce
for adultery only. New York has the most drastic law of any of the
States; as a consequence it has in proportion to the population, about
seven times as many proven cases of adultery as any other State. There
are nearly four times as many such cases there, as in the neighboring
State of Pennsylvania. This is not because the good people of New York
are so much worse than their neighbors, but because the law requires
that residents of the former State, who desire divorce, commit
adultery; unless they have the time, money and inclination to go to
Reno.
The effort to compel men and women to live together against their own
free will, which is the purpose of stringent divorce laws, has caused
even more immorality inside of marriage than it has outside. Immoral
conditions are never so dangerous as when they exist in marriage. And
besides, the fundamental policy of our laws which not only permits,
but requires an investigation of divorce causes, is highly productive
of evil. Many of the divorce cases in New York are simply food for a
set of morbidly curious scandal-mongers. Even the Mohammedans consider
our practice in this respect extremely vulgar: there is no more reason
why a court should know why a husband and wife wish to separate than
why they wish to marry.
Nevada most certainly has the most sane and moral divorce laws of any
of the States. More than half a century ago, in 1861, Nevada enacted
its divorce laws in their present form. It then, as now, provided for
only six months residence before filing suit. This was in line with
its other liberal legislation and with legislation in other Western
States. This divorce statute included, and still includes, seven
causes of action: impotency, adultery, desertion for one year,
conviction of a felony, gross drunkenness, cruelty and failure of the
husband for a period of one year to provide the common necessities of
life.
In addition to this there is another splendid feature of the Nevada
divorce law. It is not necessary to have witnesses, except to prove
the fact that one is a resident in Nevada. The plaintiff's testimony
is sufficient, unless the case is contested.
This law eliminates the despicable bribing of witnesses which so often
happens in other states. It also eliminates the obscene, immoral and
vulgar courtroom discussions which are often the result of calling
witnesses in divorce cases.
The wisdom of this early legislation in Nevada is shown by the fact
that more than fifty years afterwards the United States Commission of
Uniform Legislation, in preparing a law on divorce to be offered for
adoption by all states, has recommended Nevada's statute almost word
for word. It should be remembered that this Commission is made up of
the greatest thinkers of modern times: lawyers, jurists, professors,
moralists and statesmen.
No one criticises Nevada's causes for action. It is admitted that
divorce, when it results from any one of these causes, is the only
remedy for unfortunate relations, which, without such remedy, would
injure society. A great majority of the leading thinkers and writers
in our churches today admit that these causes of action are not too
broad.
I believe that Maryland has one of the most lenient divorce laws of
any of the Southern States. A divorce is granted to residents after
three years' separation. The decree is granted to the one deserted.
Some of the Eastern and Southern States, in this respect, are still in
the throes of the dark ages.
The Western States, practically all of them west of the Mississippi
River, have seen the perfidy and injustice resulting from such narrow
exactions. These modern, progressive ideas have crystallized into the
form of wise legislation, the statutes of many of the States being
almost identical with that of the State of Nevada.
In South Carolina no divorce is permitted on any ground. New York is
but little better since the only cause recognized is adultery.
New York's rigidity in this respect has annually led thousands of
people to resort to revolting and immoral acts and join in collusion,
in order to obtain relief from wretched and unbearable marriage bonds.
Such laws are unjust. Such laws wreck valuable lives. With strong
characters they lead only to unhappiness; with the weak, they result
in immoral living.
The question then: "Is divorce ever right?" must be answered in the
affirmative.
Why should two persons, who find after reasonable trial that they have
made a mistake, and that they are wholly unsuited for each other,
physically, morally and intellectually, be compelled to live together?
What is at first mutual indifference, ripens gradually into loathing
and hatred. Such conditions bring into the world innocent children,
begotten not of love, as marriage presupposes, but of disgust, hatred,
lust and incompatibility. Is it not a fact, established by the most
reliable medical authorities and celebrated criminologists, that crime
is fostered in the minds of children begotten of inharmonious
relationship?
We can never fathom the depth of untold sorrow brought about by
unfortunate marriages, where there is no way to annul them. This
burden upon mankind has resulted in countless desertions, felonies,
drunkenness, murders and suicides.
"In the daytime when she moved about me,
In the night, when she was sleeping at my side,--
I was wearied, I was wearied of her presence.
Day by day and night by night I grew to hate her--
Would God that she or I had died!"
--Kipling.
There is no stronger plea for divorce than hatred; all things
mentally, morally and physically bad originate from hatred.
I clipped the following from the Pall Mall Gazette of London, England,
of May 2oth, 1920:
EASY DIVORCE
Opinions of the Typical Englishman To the Editor of the Pall Mall
Gazette,
"Sir:-If it is not too late to answer some of the arguments brought to
bear on 'Easy Divorce,' as Lady Beecham calls it, or, as I prefer to
call it, the proposed equalisation of the Divorce Laws on which she
wrote recently, I would like to know how far the sentiments of the
'Typical Englishman' mentioned in the article are known to Lady
Beecham.
"Among many great men she mentions Gladstone. Now, his opinion on the
subject is surely well known, as in 1857 he supported an amendment
moved by Mr. H. Drummond that infidelity alone on the part of a
husband should entitle the wife to the dissolution of the marriage.
Gladstone's speech was, I believe, an earnest attack upon the
injustice of the Divorce Bill to women.
"An able advocate, Sir Charles Russell, once described the action of a
man whose wife was seeking a divorce from him in the following strong
terms: 'This was not a case of mere vulgar acts of infidelity, but it
was that of a man whose continued course of conduct, consistent only
in its profligacy and heartlessness, had brought the wife into a
condition by which the marriage tie had become a galling chain.'
"If the conduct of the respondent did not amount to legal cruelty, the
law was in an anomalous state, and did emphasize in a marked manner
the inequality which existed in the laws relating to these matters
between men and women.
"George Eliot once wrote: 'These things are often unknown to the
world; for there is much pain that is quite noiseless, and vibrations
that make human agonies are often a mere whisper in the roar of
hurrying existence."
"Thackeray in 'The Newcomes' speaks of 'matrimonial crimes where the
woman is not felled by the actual fist, though she staggers and sinks
under the blows quite as cruel and effectual, where with old wounds
still unhealed, she strives to hide under a smiling face to the
world.'
"How anyone can find it in their heart to state that incurable
insanity should not be ground for divorce is inexplicable to me; but
as it is well known that partial insanity even is not, and I know of
an instance of a man who went twice into an asylum and came back twice
to his wife, the poor woman bearing him on each occasion another
child. Even this is not a ground for divorce. The Cruelty in refusing
the injured person her freedom seems almost incredible."
The first wrong step between young people is impossible to avoid,
since during courtship both wear masks, each trying to impress the
other that he or she is a paragon of all virtues. The net result is,
that the truth often becomes a horrible revelation immediately after
the wedding ceremony. Unhappy and mismated marriages, without means of
rectification, are the curse of civilization, the living, gnawing
cancer of society.
In 1913, Nevada, under the lash of exaggerated newspaper notoriety,
enacted a law changing the period of residence for the plaintiff in
divorce actions from six months to one year. From Nevada's territorial
existence down to that time it had been six months.
It is a matter of history that Nevada extended to the world
inducements to go to her sparsely settled lands, in the way of liberal
legislation and short periods of residence to acquire rights of full
citizenship-franchise included. A man becomes, under Nevada laws, a
full fledged citizen and voter at the end of six months. To him is
extended every privilege of government and from him is exacted every
obligation of government, and the fact that at the end of six months
he can bring an action for divorce is a consequence of these laws, and
not--as is often thought--their purpose.
Consequently, changing the law on the point of one of its principles
instead of equally on all was irrational and illogical. Small wonder,
therefore, that in 1915 the people, acting through their legislators
and Governor, restored the period of residence in action for divorce
to six months. It is now in strict conformity with their other laws,
and with the same rights prescribed by them. Nevada's inhabitants have
rescinded their act of 1914, by which they allowed immigrants and
citizens to be robbed of a valuable right. The overwhelming vote of
the legislature and approval of the bill by the Governor clearly shows
the public opinion upon the subject. If it be right to commence action
for divorce in one year, then it is right in six months. Length of
period of residence is not a moral question. In this act the people of
Nevada believe that they are morally and legally right, and that they
are materially helping the progress of humanity.
It is often supposed that one can secure a divorce in Reno without
having to present grounds or causes for it. Let me hasten to
disillusion such "idealists." As mentioned above, there are seven
causes for divorce in this State, any one of which in the eyes of the
liberal Nevada law, is sufficient justification for a dissolution of
marriage.
A fact which perhaps is not generally known is that one may leave the
state temporarily any time after establishing a residence, provided,
however, that the time during which one has been absent, is eventually
"made up," that is; the actual presence in the state and county must
amount to six months.
In one divorce case at which I was present,--Mrs. Jones versus Mr.
Jones--, the questions to a six months' resident were as follows:
Q. Are you the plaintiff in this action?
Q. What relation does Mr. Jones bear to you?
Q. When were you married?
Q. Where were you married? Q. Are there any children of this marriage?
Q. It is stated in the complaint that since your marriage to Mr. Jones
he has been guilty of habitual gross drunkenness, which he has
contracted since the marriage. Will you please state to the court the
circumstances in regard to his acts of habitual drunkenness?
Q. Have his acts of habitual gross drunkenness incapacitated him from
contributing his support to the family?
Q. What effect have his habits of gross habitual drunkenness had upon
his performing his part of the marital relations?
Q. Please refer to page 5 paragraph--of your complaint and read it as
to your reasons for coming to Reno, Nevada.
Q. When did you come to the Count; of Washoe, State of Nevada?
Q. Where have you been residing since you came to Reno, Nevada?
Q. Have you been engaged in any occupation or profession during your
residence in Reno, Nevada?
Q. What is your intention in regard to your continuing your residence
in the State of Nevada?
Q. What was your former name?
Q. Do you desire to be restored to your former name for business and
property reasons?
Q. It is stated in the complaint as a second cause of action that Mr.
Jones for more than one year last past has failed, neglected and
refused to provide you with the common necessities of life. Please
state, if any, what provisions he has made for your support and how he
has supported you, if at all. Q. It is stated in the complaint that he
has been during all the said time and is now an able-bodied, talented
man, and has been and is now in receipt of liberal salaries for his
services. Please state to the court what the facts are in regard to
this.
Q. Has his failure to provide you with the common necessities of life
been the result of poverty or sickness and could he have avoided such
failure by ordinary industry?
Q. Please state how you have supported yourself.
Q. It is stated in the complaint as a third cause of action that Mr.
Jones has been guilty of extreme cruelty to you in the State of Texas
and in the State of New York. Please state to the court what his
treatment has been to you in the way of using vulgar language to you
and calling you vile names.
Q. What occurred at New York City on or about May, 1919, in regard to
the conduct of the defendant, in regard to his father and his coming
to the hotel in a condition of intoxication.
Q. It is stated that at Waco, Texas, the defendant would drink and
keep you awake until a late hour in the morning. Please state to the
court the circumstances of his conduct.
Q. What occurred during the winter of 1919 at New York City in regard
to Mr. Jones flourishing a loaded revolver and threatening to kill
you?
Q. What effect did his treatment of you have upon your being compelled
to leave him?
Q. What have you done in regard to endeavoring to persuade Mr. Jones
to cease his excessive use of intoxicating liquors, his exhibition of
ugly conduct, his vile language, to induce him to resume a normal
condition of conduct and treat you with kindness?
Q. What effect, if any, has his habitual gross drunkenness and extreme
cruelty--to you had upon your happiness and health, and how has it
affected you mentally and physically?
Q. What effect has it had upon the intent and purposes of
intermarriage and rendering your life with your husband unendurable,
miserable and unbearable?
In this case the charges were non-support and drunkenness and extreme
cruelty.
The plaintiff in a divorce case need not become seriously concerned
because a defendant has refused to sign papers at the time he or she
has been served. Personal service upon the defendant--the mere fact
that the papers are handed to the defendant is sufficient, whether he has
accepted them or not--or service by publication and mailing in Nevada will
accomplish the same purpose; except that there will be a delay of forty days
in the first case and eighty-two in the latter; however, if the defendant is
not represented, or does not appear, there may arise the question as to
the legality of the divorce in some States, especially in New York State.
It will obviate considerable delay and inconvenience, if the defendant
will sign and file his personal answer, admitting the plaintiff's
allegations of residence, marriage, children, etc., but denying the
cause of action. This answer should also contain an express waiver of
notice of all proceedings. An answer cannot be signed, however, until
the complaint is filed: the complaint cannot be--filed until six
months have elapsed: therefore the divorce is not granted in six
months, as is the impression which so many have, but the suit may be
started at the termination of the six months' period.
An expeditious and simple method of facilitating proceedings is to
have the defendant appoint a lawyer in Nevada, granting him the power
of attorney to accept service of the complaint. Since this can be
provided for in advance the delay after the case has been filed can be
reduced to a minimum.
Below is the form of the Power of Attorney:
"KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, That I, John Jones, of the Town of
Waco, County of....... State of Texas, hereby constitute and
appoint........ of the city of Reno, County of Washoe, State of
Nevada, as my true and lawful attorney, in fact and at law for me and
in my name to act for me and appear for me as my attorney in any
action that may or shall be instituted by Mary Jones, my wife, against
me for the dissolution of the bonds of matrimony existing between us,
in the second Judicial District Court of the State of Nevada, in and
for the County of Washoe; and in any such action to accept service of
summons thereon and to plead to or demur to, or to answer any verified
complaint or other pleading that may or shall be filed by said Mary
Jones in any action in said court; and to do and perform any other act
or acts or to take any other proceeding or proceedings he shall deem
proper in said action.
"GIVING AND GRANTING unto my said attorney or his substitute full
power and authority to do and perform all and every act and thing
whatsoever requisite and necessary to be done in and out of said
action, as fully and to all intents and purposes as I might or could
do if personally present with full power of substitution, hereby
ratifying and confirming all that my said attorney or his substitute
may do or shall cause to be done by virtue of these presents.
"IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and seal this......
day of July A. D., 1917.
"STATE OF TEXAS, COUNTY OF....... ss.:
"On this.... day of July, A. D., 1917, personally appeared before me, a
Notary Public, in and for the County of......... State of Texas, John
Jones, known to me to be the person described in and who executed the
foregoing instrument and who acknowledged to me that he executed the
same freely and voluntarily and for the uses and purposes therein
mentioned.
"IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my
official seal the day and year in this certificate first above
written.
"Notary Public in and for the County of ......... State of Texas.
Many people are under the impression that it is absolutely essential
to engage a lawyer before reaching Reno, or immediately upon arrival.
Both of these conceptions are erroneous. It is considerably wiser to
make one's selection after taking up a residence, when one has had an
opportunity to discuss the matter with the local people who "know the
ropes," and who are thus in a position to advise one right. No legal
action is necessary until some months have elapsed, unless of course
the case be exceptional, as the one below for instance.
The Nevada law provides that a suit for divorce may be immediately
commenced in the county "where the defendant may be found." From this
it will be seen that a plaintiff who has been a resident of Nevada for
ten days or even one day, may sue at once if the defendant can be
found in Nevada for service. That is, no six months period of
residence is necessary at all, if the defendant happens to be there,
or comes there for a reconciliation, to regain custody of children, to
obtain a satisfactory property settlement, or for any other legitimate
purpose, free from collusion.
A celebrated case of this kind was tried at Minden, Nevada, in 1920.
Below is a list of questions asked the plaintiff by the lawyer:
Q. When did you first come here?
A. The 15th day of February.
Q. Have you any other residence?
A. No, sir.
Q. Is it your intention to make Nevada your residence?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Did you by any means know of the coming of your husband into this
state?
A. No, sir.
Q. Did you make any arrangements whereby he was to come into this
state?
A. No, sir.
Q. When did you first learn that he was in this State?
A. A friend told me he was coming to Nevada on business to look for a
coal mine.
Q. Did he mention any place your husband might be going to?
A. Yes, he said something about Gold Hill.
Question by the Judge:
Answer by Plaintiff:
Q. Do you know where there are coal mines in Gold Hills? You mean gold
mines.
A. Yes, gold mines.
Questions by lawyer:
Answers by Plaintiff:
Q. What if anything did you do on hearing that he might come into this
state?
A. Why, I telephoned you and informed you.
Q. Did you see your husband?
A. No, sir.
Questions by Judge:
Answers by Plaintiff:
Q. Did you have anything to do with the appearance of your husband in
this vicinity?
A. No, sir.
Q. I want to have you very clear on this. No arrangements were made
between yourself and your husband whereby he was to come into this
state?
A. No, sir.
Q. When was it that you determined to stay in Nevada?
A. When the doctor told me I needed a change.
Q. And when was that?
A. That was at Christmas, about two weeks after.
Q. Have you ever, directly or indirectly, had any understanding with
your husband that you should come into the State of Nevada and later--
being here--that he should come into this state, that you should
institute divorce proceedings and have him served with papers?
A. No, sir.
Q. Is it your purpose and intention to [remainder of question and
answer missing in original]
Q. Did you have anything to do with the appearance of your husband in
this vicinity?
A. No, sir.
Q. I want to have you very clear on this. No arrangements were made
between yourself and your husband whereby he was to come into this
state?
A. No, sir.
Q. When was it that you determined to stay in Nevada?
A. When the doctor told me I needed a change.
Q. And when was that?
A. That was at Christmas, about two weeks after.
Q. Have you ever, directly or indirectly, had any understanding with
your husband that you should come into the State of Nevada and later--
being here--that he should come into this state, that you should
institute divorce proceedings and have him served with papers?
A. No, sir.
Q. Is it your purpose and intention to remain in the State of Nevada
as a resident and particularly in the County of Douglas?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Is it your purpose to build here?
A. Well, if I can find a place to suit me I will.
Q. And have you given up Los Angeles as your residence, and your
permanent residence is Genoa, Douglas County, Nevada?
A. Until I regain my health, but this will be my home.
Q. Do I understand that you have come into this state in good faith,
seeking health and nothing else?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. That you have not come into the State of Nevada for the purpose of
instituting divorce proceedings?
A. No, sir.
Q. That is absolutely so?
A. Absolutely.
By the Judge:
"I think I have gone into this question pretty thoroughly. I feel that
I should do so in all these matters in view of the fact that our
statute requires a six months' residence. Therefore we should look
into these matters thoroughly. That is all."
Because of various newspaper items recently published the public has
got the idea that the Reno divorce law has been changed. The following
article, clipped from the Nevada State Journal of February 2nd, 1921,
will explain the change in the laws as amended on that date:
SCOTT DIVORCE BILL PASSES UNAN-
IMOUSLY-SENATE BILL PROVIDES
THAT PARTY MUST HAVE LIVED
IN STATE SIX MONTHS.
"Carson City, Feb. 1.--The Senate today passed the measure introduced
by Senator Scott to amend the present divorce law. The bill as drawn
re-enacts the law now in force, with the added provision, that at
least one of the parties to an action for divorce must have resided in
the State of Nevada not less than six months prior to commencement of
the suit.
"On recommendation of the judiciary committee, the bill was amended,
to make the beginning of a suit possible in cases where "the cause of
action shall have occurred within the county while plaintiff and
defendant were actually 'domiciled' therein." In a talk urging passage
of the bill as amended, Senator Scott declared that at least 90 per
cent, of the odium attached to Nevada because of its divorce law was
due to the fact that a few unscrupulous persons and attorneys-by means
of collusion-so arrange matters as to take advantage of the "Where the
defendant may be found" clause. He stated that he feared that unless
some change as he proposed was made that people might soon go to that
extreme and demand an enactment of legislation much more severe in its
requirements. He presented the bill, "not as an attorney, but as a
citizen of Nevada to cure what as a citizen he believed to be an
evil." The amendments were adopted, and the bill passed, Senator Ducey
answering "No," on roll call.
"At the afternoon session of the Senate, Senator Ducey rose to ask a
question of privilege, and proceeded to explain his vote by stating
that he had failed to get the gist of the amendment. He thereupon
requested that the Senate grant him the courtesy of a reconsideration
of the vote taken at the morning session. Under the unanimous consent
rule, a motion for reconsideration carried, after which the bill was
passed with sixteen senators voting in its favor."
[Illustration: Picture of Sir H. Walter Huskey] Following is a letter
from H. Walter Huskey, one of Reno's prominent lawyers, in which at my
request he answers some very important questions. Much of the
information I have already given you in the foregoing pages, but I
think it a good idea to give you the questions exactly as answered by
him. This information really consists of most valuable legal advice to
anyone anticipating a visit to Reno.
Twenty-second October,1920.
"Dear Mrs. Stratton:
"I am very happy to have your letter of the 11th instant, and to note
that you are making such splendid progress with your book.
"My time and services are always at your command, even though you have
asked me some questions that are not strictly in the horizon of a
lawyer's work.
"The advantages of Nevada's divorce laws are as follows:
"The residence is only six months, but requires actual presence in the
county where the action is to be filed. We have six causes of action
for the husband, and--by adding neglect of the husband to provide the
plaintiff with the common necessities of life--seven for the wife.
"In most states corroborative evidence is required, that is, testimony
of evidence tending to corroborate the allegation and testimony of the
plaintiff. In Nevada no corroborative evidence is required in the
absence of a contest, that is, testimony of the plaintiff alone in a
non-contested case is sufficient.
"In most or many of the states, the decree of divorce when granted is
not final and absolute, that is, in some states it is interlocutory,
requiring another appearance in court at the end of six months or a
year. In other states, either one or both parties are forbidden the
right to marry for six months or one year or longer, or the defendant
is given six months in which to appeal, or one or both parties are
placed under disabilities preventing immediate marriage. In Nevada the
decree is absolute the moment granted and the minister, if desired,
may be waiting at the court house door to perform the new marriage
ceremony.....
"With these few remarks I shall take up your questions by number:
"1. Where to go upon arrival?
"There are three good hotels in Reno; the Riverside Hotel, Hotel
Golden and the Overland Hotel. Besides the hotels we have two or three
good apartment houses. Many people go directly to the private boarding
houses where room and board can be had at more reasonable figures.
"2. What attitude to take up with the local people: what to do: what
to avoid?
"In the great West strangers are taken to be alright, until they prove
themselves otherwise. It is unlike the East or South, where one must
prove oneself as to character and standing, before one can hope to be
admitted into the better circles of society. Fully ninety per cent, of
the people who come to Nevada to become bona fide residents with the
expectation of taking advantage of Nevada's lenient divorce laws, are
people of high character and standing. It is naturally well to mix
with Reno's people, to keep oneself as straight and restricted as one
would do at home, and to avoid the tendency to throw off all restraint
when one passes west of the Rocky Mountains.
"3. Are there any crook lawyers?
"There are crook lawyers, but not in Reno. There were one or two who
have been indicted and disbarred. Sometimes it is possible-when the
address can be found-to communicate with the defendant spouse and stir
up trouble by offering to defend him or her free of charge, hoping by
such action to be placed in position to squeeze a few hundred dollars
out of the plaintiff. The best way to avoid this is to go to Reno and
look over the field before selecting an attorney.
"4. The possibility of blackmail?
"The only possibility in the nature of blackmail comes from
unprofessional practitioners like those mentioned in the preceding
paragraph, who, in some way having the address of the defendant,
communicate with him or her in the hope of stirring up trouble and
representing the defendant in the contest. When relations are thus
taken up with the proposed defendant, these lawyers usually notify the
plaintiff that if the plaintiff will come to him or to a lawyer of his
selection--someone closely associated with him--the matters can be
adjusted and the divorce granted. The position taken by our County
Clerk, under our law, in refusing absolutely to allow anyone, other
than the parties and attorneys for the parties in a divorce suit, to
have access to the papers greatly reduces the field of this blackmail
and protects many innocent people.
"5. How do you proceed with the case?
"Upon arrival in Reno a new resident ought to find a reputable lawyer,
consult him, retain him by paying him possibly one-third of the fee,
and state to him the entire cause of action. The lawyer will take down
the facts, given a receipt or contract showing the total fee to be
paid; will make a record of the beginning of the residence period and
will talk to the client generally about his or her cause of action,
and the steps necessary to be taken toward establishing a bona fide
residence that will hold water against all attack. Many persons have
failed in contested cases, because of statements they have placed in
letters to friends and relatives. These statements often show that the
plaintiff is only serving time in Nevada, and, if brought to the
attention of the court, will defeat one's allegation of residence upon
which the jurisdiction of the court depends. Without jurisdiction no
divorce can be granted.
"6. What is the first step?
"7. What if you cannot serve?
"After the six months' residence period is completed, the first step
is to prepare, verify and file the complaint. This complaint is a
clear statement of the plaintiff's cause or causes of action. At the
time of filing this complaint the summons is issued and handed to the
attorney for the plaintiff. Where the defendant is not willing to file
an answer or demurrer, and thus submit to the jurisdiction of the
court, an "Affidavit for Publication" is sworn to by the plaintiff,
and an "Order for Publication" is prepared for the signature of the
judge, and being signed by him, is filed with the Clerk of the Court.
After publication is ordered service may be made by publication once a
week for six weeks in a Reno paper and by mailing a copy of the
complaint attached to a copy of the summons to the defendant at his or
her last known residence.
"After publishing for six weeks, it is necessary to wait for a period
of forty days during which time the defendant may answer. Service is
complete only at the end of publication, and a defendant living
outside of Nevada is entitled to the full period of forty days after
service.
"Below is a facsimile of different forms of 'Service by Publication':
SUMMONS
No. 16447 Dept. No. 2.
IN THE SECOND JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA, IN AND
FOR THE COUNTY OF WASHOE. L.M.M., plaintiff vs. A.M.M., defendant.
The state of Nevada sends greeting to said defendant:
You are hereby summoned to appear within ten days after the service
upon you of this summons if served in said county, or within twenty
days if served out of said county but within said judicial district
and in all other cases within forty days (exclusive of the day of
service), and defend the above-entitled action. This action is brought
to recover a judgment and decree of this court forever severing and
dissolving the bonds of matrimony now and heretofore existing between
the parties hereto upon the grounds of desertion, adultery and extreme
cruelty as described in the complaint.
Dated this 15th day of December, A. D., 1920 E.H.BEEMER,
Clerk of the Second Judicial District Court of the State of Nevada, in
and for the County of Washoe.
By G. R. ELLITHORPE,
Leroy F. Pike, Deputy.
Attorney for Plaintiff.
SUMMONS IN THE SECOND JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA, IN AND
FOR THE COUNTY OF WASHOE. I.M.G., plaintiff, vs. S.L.G., defendant.
The State of Nevada sends greeting to said defendant:
You are hereby summoned to appear within ten days after the service
upon you of this summons if served in said county, or within twenty
days if served out of said county but within said judicial district
and in all other cases within forty days (exclusive of the day of
service), and defend the above-entitled action. This action is brought
to recover and decree dissolving the bonds of matrimony existing
between you and said plaintiff, upon the ground that you wilfully
failed, neglected and refused to provide for said plaintiff the common
necessaries of life for a period of more than two years next preceding
the commencement of this action, although having the ability so to do;
awarding to said plaintiff the care, custody and control of the two
minor children, the issue of the marriage between you and said
plaintiff, to wit: G.L.G. and R.O.G.; and for general relief, as
alleged and described in the complaint of said plaintiff now on file
in said action in the office of the Clerk of the above named court,
and to which said complaint reference is thereby made and said
complaint made a part hereof.
Dated this 8th day of January, A. D., 1921.
E. H. BEEMER,
Clerk of the Second Judicial District Court of the State of Nevada, in
and for the County of Washoe.
A. A. SMITH, Attorney for Plaintiff,
312 Clay Peters Bldg., Reno, Nevada. Jl5-22-29;F5-l2-l9-2e
"8. What if you can serve?
"Six weeks of time may be saved if the defendant can be served with
complaint and summons. This personal service outside the state of
Nevada is equivalent to completed service by publication, and the
defendant has forty days in which to answer.
"9. What if the defendant does not fight?
"In cases where the defendant is willing that a decree should be
granted, much time and some expense may be saved by defendant signing
and filing a short formal answer, admitting plaintiff's allegations of
residence, marriage, children, etc., but denying the causes of action.
By filing this answer personally, or by retaining a Reno lawyer to
accept services and file it for the defendant, the defendant need not
visit Nevada at all. The case can then be closed up, and the decree
granted within ten days after the expiration of the six months. By the
filing of this short answer the defendant submits to the jurisdiction
of the court, and any decree of divorce granted is valid and effective
for plaintiff and defendant alike beyond any question, the world over.
"10. What if the defendant fights?
"If the defendant fights the case, evidence and testimony must be
introduced and the case tried as other contested causes in other
states. If the defendant be the wife, she can by filing affidavits
showing her position financially compel the plaintiff husband, before
proceeding with his case, to advance such sums of money as may be
necessary to cover costs, attorney's fees, alimony pending the suit
and traveling expenses to and from Reno.
"11. What about the chances for losing?
"In the absence of a contest, if a divorce case in Nevada be prepared
by a lawyer who knows his business, there is no real reason for
losing. If the cause be contested, then it all depends upon the
allegations and proofs of the plaintiff as compared with the
allegations and proofs of the defendant. Probably three cases out of
four (contested cases) are won by the plaintiff.
"12. How is the case called?
"When the case has been filed and the time during which the defendant
is permitted to answer has passed, a default is prepared by the
attorney for the plaintiff, and signed and filed by the county clerk.
In cases where the defendant has appeared personally or by counsel and
an answer has been filed, they are ready for trial. On calendar day,--
which comes each Monday--either the default case or the case in which
an answer has been filed is called to the attention of the court by
the plaintiff's counsel and is set down for trial by the court--
usually some day that week.
"13. Procedure of an actual case? Witnesses: Questions?
"The trial of undefended divorce suits usually takes about fifteen or
twenty minutes. The only witnesses necessary are those to Prove
"residence in Reno" for the period of six months. Room rent receipts
are not sufficient. Usually it is necessary to call the landlady of
the rooming house, or the clerk of the hotel where the plaintiff has
resided to show a continued residence in the County of Washoe. Where
the plaintiff moves about frequently from one rooming house to
another, it is more difficult to prove continuous residence. A
residence in the county is all that is needed and all that has to be
proved, however, and often plaintiffs in the summer time spend a month
or two on that portion of Lake Tahoe which is in Washoe County.
"14. Is this case treated publicly or privately?
"All cases are tried in a court room which is open to the general
public, unless the allegations are of such immorality in the complaint
that the proof should not be heard by the general public. Divorce
cases are so common in Reno, however, that the public rarely attend.
"15 Does the decree allow you to take back your own name?
"If the plaintiff be a woman and if there be no children the issue of
the marriage, she will be allowed, if requested in the complaint, to
take back her maiden name. The decree signed by the court simply
orders that the plaintiff's maiden name be restored to her. If there
be children the issue of the marriage, the maiden name of the mother
will not be restored to her for the reason that it is thought that the
mother should retain the name of her children.
"16. What is the entire cost?
"The entire cost of a non-contested case ranges from $22 to $30. If
the case be contested there is no telling how high the cost may run.
The cost of taking numerous depositions might amount to $50 or $100 or
more. If the question is intended to cover the fees for lawyers'
services, I would say that they run from nothing up to several
thousand dollars. The usual fee for a person of ordinary means is
about $250, which is probably the average fee in such cases in Reno,
but persons of wealth often pay from $1,000 to $5,000.
"17. In what sense are witnesses used, and how do they strengthen the
case; is it the same as in the East?
"In all non-contested cases, either where they go by default or where
the defendant voluntarily files his answer after the residence for six
months is proved, the plaintiff's testimony is sufficient to prove his
or her cause of action, that is, no testimony beyond that of the
plaintiff is needed where the case is not contested. In the event of a
contest, the more witnesses and depositions one can procure the more
likely they are to win.
"18. Can the divorce be obtained at once if the defendant can be
served in the state?
"The statutes of Nevada expressly provide that, if the cause of action
occurred in Nevada, that is, if the last acts of the defendant took
place in Nevada, or if the plaintiff and defendant last cohabited in
Nevada, or if the defendant without collusion can be served with
papers in Nevada, the plaintiff need not reside there six months or
for any other definite period. In line with this express provision of
Nevada's laws, if a plaintiff comes to Nevada to begin a residence,
and if the defendant comes here for any other purpose than to submit
to service of the papers, which would be collusion, but bona-fide to
secure the custody of children, to procure a settlement of property
matters and alimony, to bring about a reconciliation, etc., service of
the summons and complaint may forthwith be made upon him in Reno, and
the case may proceed to trial at the end of ten days without the six
months' residence period by either party.
"19. How is the fee paid, and when?
"As to fees for legal services, some attorneys require the entire fee
in advance; some allow the fee to wait until some adjustment or
settlement is made, or until the case is ready for trial, but the
better method for both client and attorney is for the client to pay
down one-third of the fee as a retainer, one-third at the time of
filing the complaint, and the balance of one-third on the day set for
the final trial of the case.
"20. Please state the effect the Nevada divorce has in different
states. For instance, I know a woman who got her divorce in Nevada and
married again in New York; her first husband sued her for divorce in
New York and accused her of adultery and got a divorce. Please state
if the divorce is absolutely legal when the defendant is not
represented, because I am very anxious that my book shall state only
facts. I don't want to lead anyone astray on that subject. I am quite
sure the divorce is not legal if it is simply obtained by advertising,
as I myself was about to be handed back my divorce papers, and refused
a marriage license in New York, when I explained that my husband had
been personally represented. If that had not been the case I would not
be the happy lady I am today.
"Nevada divorces, exactly like the divorces granted in other states,
are valid as follows: if the defendant be served in Nevada, in the
event he appears in the cause either for contest or voluntarily, for
the purpose of submitting to the jurisdiction of the court, the decree
is absolute and valid the world over, freeing both parties from the
moment it is granted.
"If the defendant be served outside of the state of Nevada, either
personally or by publication and mailing, and should not make an
appearance in the case, the case goes by default and the decree, which
is held valid in most cases as a matter of comity, is seriously
questioned in the states of New York, Massachusetts and Illinois. Its
validity is questioned, however, only in favor of a defendant who is a
resident and citizen of the state where its validity is brought into
court, that is, a resident of Illinois obtaining a divorce in Nevada
by default against a defendant who resides in Illinois, will find that
his decree of divorce is valid beyond a question in New York and
Massachusetts and all other states except Illinois. Likewise, a
resident of New York may depart from his home, take up his abode in
Nevada, obtain a default decree against a spouse domiciled in New York
and may marry again and live in any other state, except in the state
of New York. It might be noted here, however, that many hundreds of
plaintiffs have obtained default decrees under such circumstances and
have married again, returned to New York state and have lived there
without difficulty. Most foreign countries give validity to a Nevada
decree.
"Respectfully submitted,
"H. WALTER HUSKEY."
In considering a divorce in Nevada, the traveling expenses are quite
an item; therefore I have written to the Traffic Department of the
Pennsylvania Railroad System, and in a letter under date of February
6th, 1921, from the Traffic Manager of that company, I am indebted for
the following information:
"Regarding tickets, etc., to Reno, Nevada; round-trip tickets are not
sold to Reno, but it is possible to purchase a round-trip ticket from
New York to San Francisco or Los Angeles, and use it only as far as
Reno. (I found that the greatest advantage of this ticket was that one
could have a peep at San Francisco and Southern California without any
extra cost, as one returns to the East.--Author). This ticket has no
validation feature.
"The round-trip ticket bears a limit of nine months and it costs
$201.06, plus tax of $16.08, to either San Francisco or Los Angeles.
The one-way fare from New York to Reno is $111.63, plus tax of $8.98."
The roads used in the trip are The Pennsylvania Railroad, Chicago and
Northwestern, Union Pacific and Southern Pacific.
Below are suggestions for the best through trains quoted from 1921
time tables:
Daily Service.
Leave New York (Pennsylvania Station)
6:05 P. M., Saturday
Arrive Chicago
3:00 P. M., Sunday
Leave Chicago (Union Pacific)
7:10 P. M. Sunday, Overland Express.
Arrive Omaha
9:00 A. M. Monday
Arrive Ogden
1:00 P. M. Tuesday
Leave Ogden (Southern Pacific)
12:30 P. M., Pacific time, Tuesday.
Arrive Reno
3:25 A. M. Wednesday
In conclusion I would desire to express the sincerest heart-felt hope
that none of my readers be placed in a position where the only road to
follow is: "the Great Divide." However, when there is no way out, no
means of reconciliation, no tangible reason for submission to penal
servitude for life, the only solution left is to face the truth; to
turn one's back upon the past, and face the future!
We revere our ancestors, but the inheritance handed down to us
dissolves itself into obligations to the present: our principal
obligation to the World today is our duty to the World tomorrow! To
posterity: to those to whom "from failing hands we throw the torch...."
As Virgil said: "Nati natorum et qui nascentur ab illis:" our
children's children and those who will be born from them.
And in assuming our duty to the World tomorrow, we must start by doing
our duty to the World today: ourselves; by righting what is wrong; by
blasting the trail through life's mountainous obstacles; and purifying
the atmosphere around us and leading the World on to the light that
beacons us from beyond.
[Illustration: Renoites as seen by a Reno Cartoonist]
[ Reprint from Reno Freming Gazzette ]
[ Aug. 7 1917 ]