The News (Paterson, New Jersey)/1955/Mrs. Lindauer Sues for Divorce

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Mrs. Lindauer Sues for Divorce (1955)
3482596Mrs. Lindauer Sues for Divorce1955

Mrs. Lindauer Sues for Divorce. A Clifton woman complained in a divorce suit filed today that her Paterson husband made her watch psychological plays and movies against her will. Her husband told her she didn't remember anything anymore, Mrs. Adele Elizabeth Lindauer, of 215 Beverly Hill Road, Clifton, said in a divorce suit against Charles Lindauer, of 128 Ward Street. They were married June 20, 1941 and she contended her husband was extremely cruel between 1942 and 1954. She contended her husband kept goading her that she was out of her mind and he would have to do something about it. When they visited a psychiatrist, upon his suggestion, the psychiatrist informed them their marriage was on the rocks and both needed treatment, she said. She added that he told them her husband needed more treatment than she did. Mrs. Lindauer also accused her husband of choking and punching her and threatening to kill her. Lindauer was formerly a member of the real estate division of the State Highway Authority. In other divorce suits filed today: Thomas Vilardo, of 68 Avenue B, Lodi, accused his wife, Theresa, of 176 Third Street, Passaic, of desertion on 1953. They were married December 19, 1943. Dorothy Ophelia Fraunberger, of 48 Market Street, alleged her husband, Steven J., of 64 Bergen Street, Garfield, deserted her on September 28, 1952. They were married January 10, 1942. Anthony Patire, of 197 Marion Street 28 accused his wife, Clara J., of 29 Columbia Street, of desertion on January 22, 1953. They were married February 19, 1950. The suits were filed in the office of County Clerk Floyd E. Jones.

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it was legally published within the United States (or the United Nations Headquarters in New York subject to Section 7 of the United States Headquarters Agreement) before 1964, and copyright was not renewed.


This work may be in the public domain in countries and areas with longer native copyright terms that apply the rule of the shorter term to foreign works.

It is imperative that contributors search the renewal databases and ascertain that there is no evidence of a copyright renewal before using this license. Failure to do so will result in the deletion of the work as a copyright violation.

Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse