Fletcher v. Shaw, No. 2000-CA-00212-COA.
| Court | Court of Appeals of Mississippi |
| Writing for the Court | Before SOUTHWICK, P.J., THOMAS, and IRVING, JJ. |
| Citation | 800 So.2d 1212 |
| Parties | Tawnya Lynn FLETCHER, Appellant v. John Eric SHAW, Appellee. |
| Decision Date | 20 November 2001 |
| Docket Number | No. 2000-CA-00212-COA. |
800 So.2d 1212
Tawnya Lynn FLETCHER, Appellantv.
John Eric SHAW, Appellee
No. 2000-CA-00212-COA.
Court of Appeals of Mississippi.
November 20, 2001.
Rebecca C. Phipps, Corinth, for Appellee.
Before SOUTHWICK, P.J., THOMAS, and IRVING, JJ.
THOMAS, J., for the Court.
¶ 1. Tawnya Lynn Fletcher, the natural mother, appeals the lower court's order of custody modification which transferred custody of the minor child to John Eric Shaw, the natural father. Fletcher asserts the following issue:
FACTS
¶ 2. Fletcher gave birth to Tara Shea Fletcher Shaw on June 19, 1991, in Fairfax, Virginia. Shaw did not learn that he was Tara's father until March of 1993 when a conclusive blood analysis made such a determination. Fletcher and Shaw were never married.
¶ 3. While Fletcher was residing in Maryland with the child, she agreed with Shaw to a custody and child support contract, which was legally validated by an appropriate Maryland court. This agreement granted custody of the child to Fletcher and Shaw was granted liberal visitation rights. Soon afterward, Fletcher and Tara moved to Corinth, Mississippi.
¶ 4. On January 19, 1999, Shaw filed a motion to modify the former order of custody, alleging a material change of circumstances warranting a modification of custody. On August 17, 1999, trial was held on the motion to modify custody. Shaw called Fletcher as an adverse witness. Fletcher opted to go ahead with her direct examination at that time. After Fletcher's testimony, Shaw called his brother and then Shaw himself testified on his own behalf. After his own testimony, Shaw rested. Fletcher presented Billy and Nita Ashcraft, a couple with whom she had lived while in Mississippi. At that time, Fletcher rested.
¶ 5. At the conclusion of the trial, the chancellor held that Shaw should be granted permanent physical custody of the child subject to reasonable visitation rights granted to Fletcher.
ANALYSIS
I. DID THE CHANCELLOR COMMIT REVERSIBLE ERROR IN ORDERING A MODIFICATION OF CUSTODY WITHOUT APPLICATION OF THE PROPER LEGAL STANDARD?
¶ 6. In a domestic case, such as the case at hand, the chancellor's findings will not be reversed unless manifestly wrong, clearly erroneous, or the proper legal standard was not applied. Bland v. Bland, 620 So.2d 543, 544 (Miss.1993). In showing by the preponderance of evidence that a material change in circumstances has occurred in the custodial home, the burden of proof is on the movant. Riley v. Doerner, 677 So.2d 740, 743 (Miss.1996).
¶ 7. In cases involving an initial award of custody, as in the case of most divorces, the chancellor is given considerable discretion so long as the chancellor follows the dictates of Albright v. Albright, 437 So.2d 1003, 1005 (Miss.1983), which provides that the chancellor consider the following factors in awarding custody:
We reaffirm the rule that the polestar consideration in child custody cases is the best interest and welfare of the child. The age of the child is subordinated to that rule and is but one factor to be considered. Age should carry no greater weight than other factors to be considered, such as: health, and sex of the child; a determination of the parent that has had the continuity of care prior to the separation; which has the best parenting skills and which has the willingness and capacity to provide primary child care; the employment of the parent and responsibilities of that employment; physical and mental health and age of the parents; emotional ties of parent and child; moral fitness of parents; the home, school and community800 So.2d 1215record of the child; the preference of the child at the age sufficient to express a preference by law; stability of home environment and employment of each parent, and other factors relevant to the parent-child relationship.
Marital fault should not be used as a sanction in custody awards. Relative financial situations is not controlling since the duty to support is independent of the right to custody. Differences in religion, personal values and lifestyles should not be the sole basis for custody decisions.
Id.
¶ 8. Our supreme court has held that the basic application of the Albright analysis is to be applied in order to find the best interests of the child when a chancellor is to make a decision involving a custody dispute between the parents of an illegitimate child. Law v. Page, 618 So.2d 96, 101-2 (Miss.1993). This is true of any original decree of custody in a dispute between the natural parents of the child...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Minter v. Minter, No. 2008-CA-01114-COA.
...after having attended numerous schools, and the custodial parent's job schedule interfering with the child's care); Fletcher v. Shaw, 800 So.2d 1212, 1217(¶ 13) (Miss.Ct.App.2001) (custody modified under the traditional test because of material adverse changes of the custodial parent's freq......
-
Powell v. Powell, No. 2006-CA-01892-COA.
...is one of several supporting factors. See Jernigan v. Jernigan, 830 So.2d 651, 653-54(¶¶ 2-6) (Miss.Ct.App.2002); Fletcher v. Shaw, 800 So.2d 1212, 1215-17 (¶¶ 10-14) (Miss.Ct. App.2001); Deborah H. Bell, Mississippi Family Law, § 5.11[5][b] (1st ¶ 17. In the instant case the chancellor fai......
-
Minter v. Minter, No. 2008-CA-01114-COA (Miss. App. 10/13/2009), No. 2008-CA-01114-COA.
...after having attended numerous schools, and the custodial parent's job schedule interfering with the child's care); Fletcher v. Shaw, 800 So. 2d 1212, 1217 (¶13) (Miss. Ct. App. 2001) (custody modified under the traditional test because of material adverse changes of the custodial parent's ......
-
Romans v. Fulgham, No. 2005-CA-00873-COA.
...that Lisa had custody of A.F. Ryan waited until A.F. was seven-years old before he even requested custody. ¶ 50. In Fletcher v. Shaw, 800 So.2d 1212, 1215(¶ 8) (Miss.Ct.App.2001), this Court held that where parties enter a court approved custody agreement, the modification standard applies ......
-
Minter v. Minter, No. 2008-CA-01114-COA.
...after having attended numerous schools, and the custodial parent's job schedule interfering with the child's care); Fletcher v. Shaw, 800 So.2d 1212, 1217(¶ 13) (Miss.Ct.App.2001) (custody modified under the traditional test because of material adverse changes of the custodial parent's freq......
-
Powell v. Powell, No. 2006-CA-01892-COA.
...is one of several supporting factors. See Jernigan v. Jernigan, 830 So.2d 651, 653-54(¶¶ 2-6) (Miss.Ct.App.2002); Fletcher v. Shaw, 800 So.2d 1212, 1215-17 (¶¶ 10-14) (Miss.Ct. App.2001); Deborah H. Bell, Mississippi Family Law, § 5.11[5][b] (1st ¶ 17. In the instant case the chancellor fai......
-
Romans v. Fulgham, No. 2005-CA-00873-COA.
...that Lisa had custody of A.F. Ryan waited until A.F. was seven-years old before he even requested custody. ¶ 50. In Fletcher v. Shaw, 800 So.2d 1212, 1215(¶ 8) (Miss.Ct.App.2001), this Court held that where parties enter a court approved custody agreement, the modification standard applies ......
-
Minter v. Minter, No. 2008-CA-01114-COA (Miss. App. 10/13/2009), No. 2008-CA-01114-COA.
...after having attended numerous schools, and the custodial parent's job schedule interfering with the child's care); Fletcher v. Shaw, 800 So. 2d 1212, 1217 (¶13) (Miss. Ct. App. 2001) (custody modified under the traditional test because of material adverse changes of the custodial parent's ......