Hall v. Hall
| Decision Date | 07 November 1990 |
| Parties | Tunisha L. HALL v. Cornelius HALL. Civ. 7773. |
| Court | Alabama Court of Civil Appeals |
Roger D. Burton of Jaffe, Burton, & Digiorgio, Birmingham, for appellant.
Matthew S. Ellenberger, Birmingham, for appellee.
This is a child custody case.
Tunisha L. Hall (mother) and Cornelius Hall (father) were married on September 11, 1987. At the time of the marriage, the parties had cohabited for approximately three years, and a child was born to the parties on August 25, 1985.
The parties were divorced by order of the court on March 6, 1990, and custody of the minor child was awarded to the father. Following the denial of the mother's posttrial motions, this appeal was filed. We affirm.
The mother raises two issues on appeal. She first contends that the trial court erred in granting the father custody of the minor child because, she says, such a grant was not in the best interests of the child. She next contends that the trial court erred in refusing to admit into evidence certain exhibits.
Initially, we note that where evidence is presented ore tenus, the trial court's determination is presumed to be correct and will be set aside only if it is plainly and palpably wrong. Blankenship v. Blankenship, 534 So.2d 320 (Ala.Civ.App.1988). Inherent in this presumption is a recognition that the trial court is uniquely qualified to observe the parties and resolve issues of their credibility. Smith v. Smith, 448 So.2d 381 (Ala.Civ.App.1984).
Moreover, child custody is a matter resting within the sound discretion of the trial court. Shephard v. Shephard, 531 So.2d 668 (Ala.Civ.App.1988). The primary consideration in an award of custody is the best interests and welfare of the child. Id. In making such a determination, the trial court may consider a number of factors, including the age and sex of the child and each parent's ability to provide for the child's educational, emotional, material, moral, and social needs. Santmier v. Santmier, 494 So.2d 95 (Ala.Civ.App.1986).
Finally, in an action between parents involving an initial award of custody, it is well settled that the parties stand on equal footing and that no favorable presumption inures to either. Crosslin v. Crosslin, 494 So.2d 431 (Ala.Civ.App.1986).
Here, after hearing evidence from both parties, the trial court concluded that the interests of the child were best served by awarding custody to the father. Although there was testimony presented by the mother that the father abused alcohol and had exhibited violence towards her, the father's testimony refuted those allegations. The father also testified that he is employed and has an average weekly wage of approximately $200. Furthermore, while the mother is currently renting an apartment occupied by her and her two sons from a previous marriage, the father is the owner of the home that he and the child occupy. He further testified that during the workday, his aunt assists in caring for the child.
While the mother asserts that there was no evidence to support the father's contention that she abandoned the child, we note that the trial court did not base its...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
E.H.G. v. E.R.G. (Ex parte E.R.G.)
...seeking an initial award of custody, the parties stand on equal footing and no presumption inures to either parent. Hall v. Hall, 571 So.2d 1176 (Ala.Civ.App.1990). The trial court's overriding consideration is the children's best interests and welfare. Santmier v. Santmier, 494 So.2d 95 (A......
-
Stack v. Stack
...a recognition of the trial court's unique position to evaluate both the demeanor and the credibility of the witnesses. Hall v. Hall, 571 So.2d 1176 (Ala.Civ.App.1990). ALIMONY Whether a former spouse is living openly or cohabitating with a member of the opposite sex is a factual determinati......
-
Pickett v. Pickett
...to determine the issue of custody, because it was able to evaluate the evidence and the credibility of the witnesses. Hall v. Hall, 571 So.2d 1176 (Ala.Civ.App.1990). Our review of a trial court's custody determination is very limited; this court is not allowed to reweigh disputed evidence.......
-
Roberts v. Roberts
...on equal footing and no presumption inures in favor of either parent. Smith v. Smith, 727 So.2d 113 (Ala.Civ. App.1998); Hall v. Hall, 571 So.2d 1176 (Ala.Civ.App.1990). The court applies the best-interests-of-the-child standard in deciding an initial award of custody. Ex parte Couch, 521 S......