Simpson v. Simpson – Divorce – Insanity Defense
Simpson v. Simpson, 716 S.W.2d 27 (Tenn. 1986).
NATURE OF THE CASE: In this divorce law case, Ms. Simpson sought a divorce on grounds of cruel and inhuman treatment and Mr. Simpson asserted insanity as a defense.
FACTS: H and W married with the agreement that H would attend college first, and then W would attend after he graduated. H attended six different colleges but never obtained a degree. H made no real effort to find steady employment. The marriage was turbulent and W testified that H constantly belittled her and complained of her inability to make him happy. H was prone to uncontrolled rage and outbreaks and irrational behavior.
W eventually moved out of the home and filed for divorce based on irreconcilable differences. H kidnapped her with a handgun and told her that he was going to kill her. W testified that she was afraid to live with defendant.
At trial, H moved to dismiss W’s complaint on the basis of the defense of insanity. An expert witness physician testified that H was suffering from paranoid schizophrenia. The trial court dismissed the complaint on grounds that H was insane.
The Court of Appeals reversed on the grounds of cruel and inhuman treatment. The court reasoned that mentally ill persons may be held liable in tort if malice or evil intent is not a necessary element. The court held that it would be anomalous to hold that a spouse can obtain a recovery in a tort action against a mentally ill spouse but cannot obtain a divorce based upon the same facts. The court stated that defendant’s abduction of his wife and threats to kill her were tortious acts incompatible with the marital relationship.
ISSUE: Under what circumstances may a defendant assert insanity as a defense in a divorce action?
RULE OF LAW: A defendant in a divorce action may assert the defense of insanity to the commission of acts of cruelty only if there is proof that at the time of such conduct, as a result of mental disease or defect, the defendant lacked sufficient capacity either 1) to appreciate the wrongfulness of his or her conduct; or 2) the volition to control his or her acts.
HOLDING AND DECISION: Some courts hold that insanity is a valid defense to an action for divorce without giving consideration to the degree or character of insanity that is relied upon as a defense. The majority of the courts and the better reasoned cases consider the degree and the character of the insanity and what direct effect it has upon the plaintiff’s proof.
To successfully defend a divorce action based upon cruel and inhuman treatment, the defendant has the burden of proving that he or she was not in remission at the time of the commission of all or a sufficient number of the acts of cruelty relied upon by plaintiff and that plaintiff’s proof does not warrant dissolution of the marriage. The testimony of the expert witness fails to establish that defendant, as a result of mental illness, lacked capacity to appreciate the wrongfulness of his conduct or the volition to control his actions at the time he committed acts of cruel and inhuman treatment more than sufficient to warrant dissolution of this marriage.
DISPOSITION: Divorce granted.