Fisher v. Miller, No. 22553
| Court | United States State Supreme Court of South Carolina |
| Writing for the Court | FINNEY; NESS |
| Citation | 288 S.C. 576,344 S.E.2d 149 |
| Parties | Marie Williams Miller FISHER, Appellant, v. Robert Warren MILLER, Respondent. . Heard |
| Decision Date | 11 March 1986 |
| Docket Number | No. 22553 |
Page 149
v.
Robert Warren MILLER, Respondent.
Decided May 19, 1986.
Page 150
[288 S.C. 577] Douglas L. Hinds and Hal M. Strange of Hinds, Cowan & Strange, Georgetown, for appellant.
Kenneth L. Mitchum, Georgetown, for respondent.
FINNEY, Justice:
Appellant (Mother) initiated proceedings in the Family Court of Georgetown County seeking to gain custody of the parties' minor child from the respondent (Father), alleging a significant change of circumstances since the order awarding Father custody. The trial judge ordered custody to remain with the Father, reduced the Mother's visitations, and found the Mother in contempt of court. We affirm in part and reverse in part.
The proceedings which precipitated this appeal were all in equity and each proceeding was tried separately by a different judge; therefore, this Court may determine the facts in keeping with its view of the preponderance of the evidence. [288 S.C. 578] Townes Associates, Ltd., v. City of Greenville, 266 S.C. 81, 221 S.E.2d 773 (1976). We must look to all of the evidence and to the totality of the circumstances of the parents.
The Mother alleges that she has remarried and could provide a better home environment than that presently afforded the parties' child. Based upon the required standard of review, we conclude that the trial judge applied and followed the appropriate standard in determining the burden upon a parent seeking to change custody. Bolding v. Bolding, 278 S.C. 129, 293 S.E.2d 699 (1982). The welfare and best interests of the child are of paramount consideration in custody cases, Matthews v. Matthews, 273 S.C. 130, 254 S.E.2d 801 (1979); and not every change of circumstances will warrant a change of custody, Lowe v. Lindley, 272 S.C. 143, 249 S.E.2d 750 (1978). Remarriage alone is not sufficient to warrant a change of custody. Green v. Loveday, 270 S.C. 410, 242 S.E.2d 441 (1978).
Broad discretion is given Family Court judges who observe the witnesses and are in a better position to judge their demeanor and veracity. McAlister v. Patterson, 278 S.C. 481, 299 S.E. 322 (1982). A careful review of the entire record convinces us that the trial judge was correct in declining to grant the Mother's request to change custody. We affirm.
REDUCTION OF MOTHER'S VISITATION RIGHTS
The Mother faithfully exercised her...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Dodge v. Dodge, 2831.
...OF REVIEW In a custody dispute, the paramount and controlling factor is the welfare and best interests of the child. Fisher v. Miller, 288 S.C. 576, 578, 344 S.E.2d 149, 150 (1986). This court may find facts in accordance with its own view of the preponderance of the evidence. Epperly v. Ep......
-
Latimer v. Farmer, 25857.
...not a sufficient change of circumstance affecting the welfare of Child to warrant a transfer of custody to Mother. See Fisher v. Miller, 288 S.C. 576, 344 S.E.2d 149 (1986) (remarriage alone is not sufficient to warrant a change in custody). Likewise, a change in Father's residence is not i......
-
Pountain v. Pountain, 2849.
...In our view, the mother's remarriage is a factor properly considered in favor of granting her custody of the child. See Fisher v. Miller, 288 S.C. 576, 344 S.E.2d 149 (1986) (remarriage is a circumstance which when considered with other change of circumstances, may warrant a change of custo......
-
Alligood v. Hunt, 22680
...but did not find the remarriage sufficient in itself to justify a change of custody. This ruling was proper. See Fisher v. Miller, 288 S.C. 576, 344 S.E.2d 149 (1986); Rodgers v. Gray, 285 S.C. 111, 328 S.E.2d 478 (1985); Stutz v. Funderburk, 272 S.C. 273, 252 S.E.2d 32 (1979); Green v. Lov......