Belden v. Strickland
| Decision Date | 25 June 1962 |
| Docket Number | No. 21693,21693 |
| Citation | 126 S.E.2d 670,218 Ga. 105 |
| Parties | Mary E. Gilder BELDEN v. James Bryant STRICKLAND, Jr. |
| Court | Georgia Supreme Court |
Syllabus by the Court
The judgment of a court of competent jurisdiction of a sister State, awarding the custody of a minor child, which is regular on its face and unimpeached for fraud, is entitled to full faith and credit in proceedings for the custody of the child in this State. Such a judgment may be modified only when it appears that there has been such a change in conditions since the original decree as would authorize the modification of a similar judgment rendered by the courts of this State.
Harrison & Henry, Robert W. Harrison, Jr., Q. Robert Henry, Gary E. Gowen, St. Marys, for plaintiff in error.
A. A. Nathan, Jack T. Griffith, Brunswick, for defendant in error.
This is a habeas corpus case in Camden Superior Court involving the custody of two minor children of divorced parents wherein the petition of the mother against the father seeking to obtain their custody was denied.
The record discloses that in a decree of June 1958, the custody of the children was awarded to the father by the Camden Superior Court. The father and the two children in July 1960, were residents of Alachua County, Florida, when the mother instituted habeas corpus proceedings in the circuit court of that county against the father seeking custody of the children on the grounds of a change in conditions affecting the welfare of the children subsequent to the Georgia decree. The father, in response to the writ, appeared through counsel, moved to quash the writ, and in his response pled the Georgia decree. On February 2, 1962, the Florida court, after finding that it was for the best interest and welfare of the children that they be in the custody of their mother, awarded the children to her. In the habeas corpus action in Camden Superior Court the mother relied upon the Florida decree as a basis for her claim. The father in response relied on (a) the Georgia decree awarding him the children, (b) that he and the children in February 1962, when the Florida decree was rendered, were not residing in Florida, and (c) that there had been no change in conditions affecting the welfare of the children since the award to him in January 1958.
After a hearing the court denied the mother's petition. The bill of exceptions as certified by the trial judge recites that, 'There is no necessity for a brief of the evidence...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Guardianship of Rodgers, In re
...In re Bergmann, 133 Cal.App.2d 323, 283 P.2d 1063 (1955); Moloney v. Moloney, 167 Kan. 444, 206 P.2d 1076 (1949); Belden v. Strickland, 218 Ga. 105, 126 S.E.2d 670 (1962); Frazier v. Merrill, 237 Ark. 242, 372 S.W.2d 264 (1963); Richter v. Harmon, 243 N.C. 373, 90 S.E.2d 744 (1956); Ford v.......
-
Kelly v. Kelly
...decree. Sampsell v. Superior Court, 32 Cal.2d 763, 197 P.2d 739. For recognition of this principle in Georgia, see Belden v. Strickland, 218 Ga. 105, 126 S.E.2d 670; Locke v. Locke, 221 Ga. 603, 605, 146 S.E.2d 273; Stallings v. Bass, 204 Ga. 3, 48 S.E.2d 822; Milner v. Gatlin, 139 Ga. 109,......
-
Funderburg v. Wold
...of a similar judgment rendered by the courts of this State. Peeples v. Newman, 209 Ga. 53(1), 70 S.E.2d 749; Belden v. Strickland, 218 Ga. 105, 126 S.E.2d 670; Ferster v. Ferster, 220 Ga. 319(2), 138 S.E.2d 674. The recognized qualification applies to a condition subsequent and thus limits ......
-
Glover v. Sink, 27559
...202(1), 111 S.E. 673; Peeples v. Newman, 209 Ga. 53(1), 70 S.E.2d 749; Ottinger v. Pelt, 217 Ga. 758(2), 125 S.E.2d 52; Belden v. Strickland, 218 Ga. 105, 126 S.E.2d 670; Bowen v. Bowen, 223 Ga. 800(1), 158 S.E.2d 233. It follows that the trial court erred in refusing to hear evidence as to......