Appeal of D'Aoust
| Decision Date | 27 July 1951 |
| Parties | Appeal of D'AOUST. |
| Court | Maine Supreme Court |
Gendron, Fenderson & McDougal, Sanford, for appellant.
Lausier & Donahue, Biddeford, for appellee.
Before MURCHIE, C. J., and THAXTER, FELLOWS, MERRILL, NULTY, WILLIAMSON, JJ.
On exceptions. The care and custody of a minor child of parents living apart was given to the father by decree of the Judge of Probate upon the petition of the father under R. S. Ch. 153, Sec. 19, as amended. On appeal to the Supreme Court of Probate the decree was reversed and custody awarded to the mother.
The governing principles are familiar and well established. 'The paramount consideration for the court * * * is the present and future welfare and well-being of the child.' Grover v. Grover, 143 Me. 34, 54 A.2d 637, 638. Bond v. Bond, 127 Me, 117 at page 129, 141 A. 833, 838. See also Merchant v. Bussell, 139 Me. 118, 27 A.2d 816; Stanley v. Penley, 142 Me. 78, 46 A. 2d 710; Mitchell v. Mitchell, 136 Me. 406, 11 A. 2d 898; Sweet v. Sweet, 119 Me. 81, 109 A. 379.
It will serve no useful purpose to set forth the evidence in detail. A full and complete hearing was held in January 1951, and findings of fact were filed by the presiding justice.
The child, Michele, will be eight years of age in September next. She has been living with her father at the home of his mother and step-father in Biddeford. The father has been unemployed since leaving the service and has no income. The care and support of the child have fallen upon the grandmother and her husband. There is no suggestion that the child has not received proper care.
The question was whether it would be better for the child to remain in Biddeford or be in the custody of her mother, who is employed and lives in Boston. Obviously in reaching a decision the character of the mother and her ability to provide for the child were of the highest importance. Was she a proper and suitable person to be charged with the great responsibility sought by her?
By the first three exceptions the father urges there was no credible evidence to support findings that (1) condonation of his wife followed an affair some years in the past; (2) the mother 'has and is conducting herself properly;' and (3) the 'best interests and welfare of the child will be promoted' by the decree awarding custody to the mother.
With respect to the first exception, the presiding justice found that the husband with full knowledge of the facts had forgiven...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Central Maine Power Co. v. Public Utilities Commission
...A. 753; Wade and Dunton, Inc. v. Gordon, 144 Me. 49, 51, 64 A.2d 422; Picken v. Richardson, 146 Me. 29, 32, 77 A.2d 191; D'Aoust Appellant, 146 Me. 443, 444, 82 A.2d 409; Central Maine Power Co. v. P. U. C., 153 Me. 228, 231, 136 A.2d 'If a factual finding, basic of an order of the Commissi......
-
Ouelette v. Pageau
...presiding Justice had the right to believe what they thought was true. Richardson v. Richardson, 146 Me. 145, 78 A.2d 505; Appeal of D'Aoust, 146 Me. 443, 82 A.2d 409. The auditor's report was not impeached or disproved in the mind of the presiding Justice. It was based on competent evidenc......
-
Dumais v. Dumais
...and future welfare and well-being of the child.' Grover v. Grover, 143 Me. 34, 54 A.2d 637, 638, (custody in divorce); Appeal of D'Aoust, 146 Me. 443, 82 A.2d 409 (custody where parents living apart). 'In all cases involving custody of minors, whether the issue is presented at the instance ......
-
State v. Harnden
...Proctor v. Carey, 142 Me. 226, 49 A.2d 323; Bartley v. Couture, 143 Me. 69, 55 A.2d 438; Dingley v. Dostie, supra; Appeal of D'Aoust, 146 Me. 443, 82 A.2d 409; Ouelette v. Pageau, 150 Me. 159, 167, 107 A.2d We have studied the rather extensive record with great care. We are of the opinion t......