Arnold v. Arnold

Decision Date15 July 2002
Docket NumberNo. S02A1020.,S02A1020.
Citation275 Ga. 354,566 S.E.2d 679
PartiesARNOLD v. ARNOLD.
CourtGeorgia Supreme Court

OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE

Tina G. Stanford, Smith, White, Sharma & Halpern, Forest Park, David Alfred Webster, Atlanta, for Appellant.

Julian T. Arnold, Clarkston, for Appellee.

Stephen Randall Scarborough, Lambda Legal Def/Educ Fund, Inc., Atlanta, Amicus Appellant.

CARLEY, Justice.

Julian Arnold (Husband) filed for divorce from Kimberly Arnold (Wife) and sought custody of their minor children. A bench trial was held. In the final decree, the trial court awarded primary physical custody to Wife, but also prohibited the children from any contact with a certain named friend of Wife and imposed on her the responsibility of being sure that there was no such exposure. In the motion for new trial, Wife urged the trial court to delete this provision from the decree. The trial court denied the motion, and Wife applied for a discretionary appeal. We granted the application to determine whether imposition of the restriction complies with the standard established by Brandenburg v. Brandenburg, 274 Ga. 183, 184(1), 551 S.E.2d 721 (2001).

In the absence of any evidence that exposure to a third party will have an adverse effect on the best interests of the children, a trial court abuses its discretion by prohibiting a parent from exercising his or her custodial rights in that person's presence. Brandenburg v. Brandenburg, supra at 184(1), 551 S.E.2d 721. Here, there is no evidence that the relationship between Wife and her friend was or will be...

To continue reading

Request your trial
9 cases
  • Simmons v. Williams
    • United States
    • Georgia Court of Appeals
    • March 27, 2008
    ...from exposure to certain conduct by either parent, i.e., having overnight stays with unrelated members of the opposite sex. Compare Arnold v. Arnold14 (an order prohibiting "the children from any contact with a certain named friend of" the wife, without any evidence that mere exposure to th......
  • Mongerson v. Mongerson
    • United States
    • Georgia Supreme Court
    • June 15, 2009
    ...by prohibiting a parent from exercising his or her custodial rights in that person's presence." (Citation omitted.) Arnold v. Arnold, 275 Ga. 354, 566 S.E.2d 679 (2002). Contrary to Husband's assertion, the record contains evidence that supports the trial court's decision that exposure to t......
  • Fyffe v. Cain, A19A1162
    • United States
    • Georgia Court of Appeals
    • October 30, 2019
    ...the child was harmed or exposed to inappropriate conduct." Jewell , 346 Ga. App. at 738 (1), 816 S.E.2d 683. See Arnold v. Arnold , 275 Ga. 354, 354, 566 S.E.2d 679 (2002) ; Brandenburg v. Brandenburg , 274 Ga. 183, 184 (1), 551 S.E.2d 721 (2001). Likewise, the trial court made no finding t......
  • Norman v. Norman
    • United States
    • Georgia Court of Appeals
    • November 7, 2014
    ...because the provision would prohibit the mother “from having visitors with whom she has no romantic relationship”); Arnold v. Arnold, 275 Ga. 354, 354, 566 S.E.2d 679 (2002) (holding that trial court abused its discretion in prohibiting children “from any contact with a certain named friend......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT