Byers v. Loftis, 17603
| Decision Date | 10 October 1951 |
| Docket Number | No. 17603,17603 |
| Parties | BYERS et al. v. LOFTIS. |
| Court | Georgia Supreme Court |
W. L. Nix, Lawrenceville, for plaintiffs in error.
R. F. Duncan, Lawrenceville, for defendant in error.
Syllabus Opinion by the Court.
W. R. Byers and Louise Byers, plaintiffs in the court below and plaintiffs in error in this court, brought habeas corpus proceedings in the City Court of Gwinnett County against Mrs. H. W. Loftis, seeking the custody of Martha Sue Byers, a minor ten years of age, the child of the petitioners. At the trial of the case, the uncontradicted evidence showed that the child was the child of the petitioners, and that the respondent was not related to her; that the child had lived with the respondent since she was 11 months old, attends school regularly, and has done exceptionally well in school; that she has received excellent care; and that both parties were fit and proper persons to have the custody of the child and were financially able to care for her. As to all other material matters, the evidence was in sharp conflict. The judge was, however, authorized to find: that the petitioners lived in an apartment in the respondent's home at the time the child whose custody is involved in this action was born; that the petitioners had two older children; that, just before the child here involved was born, Mrs. Byers stated that this was an unwanted child; that, after the child was born, the father had abused her; that about 1942, some eleven months after the birth of the child, both parents left their home together without notifying any one of their intention to do so, leaving the child here involved and a small boy, who was somewhat older, in the apartment alone; that the respondent took both of them and cared for them; that the father went to New York to work, and the mother went to Atlanta, taking an older daughter with her, and went to work there; that a short time later, the mother brought the older daughter back to the respondent and left her there; that the respondent cared for all three of the children until 1944, when the petitioners came and took the two oldest children to Atlanta, where they provided a home for them; that the petitioners did not pay Mrs. Loftis anything to keep the children, or provide the necessaries for them. The child testified that she was happy and desired to remain with the respondent, and that the home of the respondent was the only home she had ever known. At the close of the evidence, the judge of the court below awarded custody of the child to the respondent. The...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
M.M.A., In re
...and likely to be harmed thereby. OCGA §§ 15-11-34, 15-11-51, 19-7-4 (Code Ann. §§ 24A-2301; 24A-3201; 74-109, 74-110); Byers v. Loftis, 208 Ga. 398, 67 S.E.2d 118 (1951). See also Gardner v. Lenon, 154 Ga.App. 748, 270 S.E.2d 36 (1980); Patty v. DHR, 154 Ga.App. 455, 269 S.E.2d 30 The recor......
-
Adams v. Kirkland, 21863
...was for the best interests and welfare of the children that they be awarded to the plaintiffs. As was pointed out in Byers v. Loftis, 208 Ga. 398, 399, 67 S.E.2d 118, 120: '[T]he evidence was in sharp conflict. The trial judge resolved that conflict against the petitioners [the plaintiff in......
-
Yancey v. Watson, 21313
...in conflict with other full-bench decisions of this court. See, for example, Bond v. Norwood, 195 Ga. 383, 24 S.E.2d 289; Byers v. Loftis, 208 Ga. 398(1), 67 S.E.2d 118; and the special concurrence by Mr. Justice Hawkins and myself in Sturkie v. Skinner, 214 Ga. 264, at page 270, 104 S.E.2d ...
-
Morrison v. Morrison, 19125
...Ga. 692, 27 S.E.2d 295; Waldrup v. Crane, 203 Ga. 388, 46 S.E.2d 919; Dornburg v. McKellar, 204 Ga. 189, 48 S.E.2d 820; Byers v. Loftis, 208 Ga. 398, 67 S.E.2d 118. 3. The respondents introduced oral and documentary evidence in support of their allegations that the mother had freely and vol......