Anderson v. Anderson, 10934
Decision Date | 20 October 1972 |
Docket Number | No. 10934,10934 |
Citation | 86 S.D. 757,201 N.W.2d 394 |
Parties | Sharon ANDERSON, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. Richard ANDERSON, Defendant and Respondent. |
Court | South Dakota Supreme Court |
Jon Mattson, Deadwood, for plaintiff and appellant.
Bogue & Weeks, Everett A. Bogue, Vermillion, for defendant and respondent.
This case comes before the Court for the second time. The former appeal is reported in 85 S.D. 152, 179 N.W.2d 1 (1970), wherein the factual situation is set forth and will not be repeated here. This Court reversed and remanded in the following language and for the following purpose:
Pursuant to the above remand a hearing was held on August 28, 1970 before the Circuit Court. Both plaintiff and defendant appeared personally and by attorney. The Circuit Court, after the presentation of the evidence and after having taken the files for consideration rendered his memorandum decision on October 1, 1970, in which he reviewed the proceedings and the issue as to pregnancy and also gave consideration to the best interests of the children. It was his finding and conclusion that the defendant did not know of plaintiff's pregnancy while she was pregnant with the child born December 22, 1967 and that he exercised reasonable diligence to determine whether or not plaintiff was pregnant and that such reasonable diligence failed to reveal to defendant such pregnancy prior to and at the time the parties entered into the stipulation of custody of the four minor children. The court also in such memorandum decision arrived at the conclusion that custody should be awarded to their father, the defendant, with reasonable visitation rights granted to the mother, the plaintiff, and directed the modification of the decree of divorce in accordance with such memorandum decision. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law were entered by the Court in accordance therewith, and a Judgment was signed October 14, 1970 in which it was, among other things,
'ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that the decree of divorce entered by this court in the above entitled action, dated January 12, 1968, be and the same is hereby modified and amended to award to the defendant Richard Leroy Anderson the care and custody of the minor children of the parties, namely, Bonnie Sue Anderson, Kimberlee Ellen Anderson, Dawn and Keith Allen Anderson.
It is further ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that the plaintiff shall have the right to visit said minor children at the home of the defendant at all reasonable times.'
The appeal on the part of the plaintiff from the court's determination is based principally upon receipt of affidavits by the trial court over objections by the plaintiff and insufficiency of the evidence or of competent evidence to support the court's determination and the court's allowing the defendant to put in additional evidence after he had rested.
In Christensen v. Christensen, 86 S.D. ---, 190 N.W.2d 62, this court said:
In Yager v. Yager, 83 S.D. 315, 159 N.W.2d 125, we held:
In Huckfeldt v. Huckfeldt, 82 S.D. 344, 146 N.W.2d 57, we held:
...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Kolb v. Kolb
...pregnancy. In Anderson, we said: Id. 179 N.W.2d at 2-3. The case was reversed and remanded. When it came back on appeal, in 86 S.D. 757, 201 N.W.2d 394, 396 (1972), we held that "the Court acted within its proper discretion and that there is sufficient competent evidence to support his acti......
-
Application of G. K., 11873
...disturbed on appeal unless the record presents a clear case of abuse. 4 Masek v. Masek, 1975, S.D., 228 N.W.2d 334; Anderson v. Anderson, 1972, 86 S.D. 757, 201 N.W.2d 394; Oursland v. Oursland, 1968, 83 S.D. 382, 159 N.W.2d 922. We find no abuse of discretion in this In an action pursuant ......
-
Masek v. Masek
...1973, 87 S.D. 133, 203 N.W.2d 531 (trial court's modification based on mother's change of residence reversed); Anderson v. Anderson, 1972, 86 S.D. 757, 201 N.W.2d 394 (trial court's modification based on wife's concealment of pregnancy at time of divorce affirmed); Hershey v. Hershey, 1970,......
-
Adam v. Adam
...the divorce action was commenced. Thus the situation that existed in Anderson v. Anderson, 85 S.D. 152, 179 N.W.2d 1; on remand, 86 S.D. 757, 201 N.W.2d 394, is not present Plaintiff testified that she learned in March of 1975 that a decree of divorce had been granted. If ever there was a t......