Dobson v. Atkinson, 17348
| Decision Date | 12 November 1957 |
| Docket Number | No. 17348,17348 |
| Citation | 232 S.C. 12,100 S.E.2d 531 |
| Parties | Hoyle Lawrence DOBSON, Appellant, v. Mary Elizabeth Dobson ATKINSON, Respondent. |
| Court | South Carolina Supreme Court |
F. Ehrlich Thomson, S. Evelyn Lester, Columbia, for appellant.
Henry W. Kirkland, Columbia, for respondent.
This appeal presents the question of whether or not the County Court for Richland County erred in granting respondent custody and permitting her to remove from the physical boundaries of this State the infant daughter of appellant and respondent.
Appellant and respondent were man and wife, to which union was born one child, Sally Pamela Dobson, approximately three years of age.
In May, 1956, appellant was granted a divorce upon the ground of desertion, with the custody of the child being given to respondent with appellant having visitorial privileges. Thereafter, respondent married one Dr. Julian E. Atkinson, a Captain in the United States Army and at that time under orders for a two year tour of duty upon the Island of Tiawan. Appellant then shortly thereafter petitioned the Court for an Order restraining and enjoining respondent from removing the child from the jurisdiction of the County Court for Richland County, setting forth that upon information and belief respondent has remarried and plans to leave and carry their child beyond the boundaries of this State; that the child is not receiving proper care in that the mother had demonstrated a lack of love and affection for said infant and does not have the temperament and disposition necessary for the proper rearing and caring for a child of tender years; and asks for permanent custody of the child. Respondent duly filed her return denying such allegations as charged that she was an unfit person to have the care and custody of the child and set forth reasons why it was for the best interest of the child that she be permitted to remain with her. She further set forth that since receiving her decree of divorce, she had married Captain Julian P. Atkinson, a medical doctor in the United States Army, who was under orders to do a two year tour of duty on the Island of Tiawan and prayed the Court that she and her husband be permitted to carry the child with them.
The case was by consent referred to Honorable William P. Donelan, Standing Master for Richland County, under a General Order of Reference, who after taking testimony reported as his findings of fact that the mother, Mary Elizabeth Dobson Atkinson, 'is a fit, proper and suitable person to have the care, control and custody of the minor child'; that the husband is a medical doctor, licensed to practice medicine in South Carolina and intends upon the completion of his tour of duty in the Armed Services, which will last approximately two years from December, 1956, to return to South Carolina to practice medicine; that the child will have adequate care, not be subjected to any undue danger and recommended that the mother be given the care, control, and custody of the minor child; and, further, that should the child be taken to Tiawan that Mrs. Atkinson and her husband be required to file joint bond to abide any further Order of the Court.
Exceptions were duly taken but overruled by the Honorable Legare Bates, Judge of the County Court of Richland County, in an Order dated December 20, 1956. Thereafter, bond in the sum of $2,500 was duly filed with the Clerk of Court for Richland County, conditioned upon Mary Elizabeth Dobson Atkinson faithfully performing the conditions of any proper Order of the Richland County Court. The Order further provided that the $10 weekly payment which had been required of appellant theretofore for support of the child be suspended until such time as she is returned to the State of South Carolina.
Appellant's appeal presents, according to his brief, the following three questions:
The first two questions are argued as one in that they are so intimately related, the facts of one necessarily involve those of the other. This, however, is an equity...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Bojilov v. Bojilov
...Husband's control. The Son thrives on stability and long trips without Wife will negatively impact Son. See Dobson v. Atkinson , 232 S.C. 12, 17, 100 S.E.2d 531, 533 (1957) (allowing the custodial parent to take the minor child to a foreign country only after finding that the child would ha......
-
Moore v. Moore, 17594
...separation of the custodian of children from the other parent see Dillon v. Dillon, 219 S.C. 255, 64 S.E.2d 649, and Dobson v. Atkinson, 232 S.C. 12, 100 S.E.2d 531. Appellant cites as requiring bond of respondent: Graydon v. Graydon, 150 S.C. 117, 147 S.E. 749; Dobson v. Atkinson, 232 S.C.......
-
Marshall v. Marshall, 0239
...child. McAlister v. Patterson, supra. In situations where removal will benefit the child, removal has been allowed. Dobson v. Atkinson, 232 S.C. 12, 100 S.E.2d 531 (1957); Watkins v. Rose, 115 S.C. 370, 105 S.E. 738 We see no abuse of discretion in this case. Initially, we note that a paren......
-
Ex parte Atkinson
...19, 1957. The respondent prosecuted an appeal to this Court and we affirmed the decree and judgment of the County Court. Dobson v. Atkinson, 232 S.C. 12, 100 S.E.2d 531. The appellant, with the child, accompanied her husband to the Island of Taiwan, where they remained until Dr. Julian E. A......