This writer is going to use the divorce case of Winifred Hudnut/Natacha Rambova versus Rudolph Valentino as an example of why women prefer to divorce in Paris. So we know that Winifred/Natacha was granted a divorce in Paris simply on the fact Valentino wrote a letter to her that he definitely and purposely left her and decided to cease all relations with her. Thus she was “grossly insulted”. But lets not forget Winifred got her knickers in a twist when she was no longer Valentino’s de facto manager and barred from movie studios. Hudnut and Valentino journeyed to Paris and it was no secret they were planning to divorce. The ruling of the Seine trial was Hudnut was entitled to all of the rights of as an American because her marriage was in Crowne Point, Indiana and “gross insult” was grounds for divorce. Most French writers contend there are three grounds for divorce under French Civil Code. Grounds for divorce are innumerable: Article 229 A husband may divorce his wife on the basis of her infidelity.Article 230 A wife may divorce her husband on the basis of his infidelity. Article 231 Both spouses may reciprocally divorce each other on the basis for violence, cruelty, or gross insults.Article 232 The condemnation of one of the spouses to a corporal punishment shall be another cause for divorce. Although no local difference is suppose to exist, so as far as husband and wife are concerned French authorities contend that in the case of an indiscretion the courts always seem to look with more indulgence upon the false step of the husband than of the wife.
28 Jun 1931 – The Case of Why Rich Women Prefer to Divorce in Paris
Categories: Uncategorized Tags: Natacha Rambova, Rudolph Valentino, Winifred Hudnut