Harrison v. Harrison, 24130
| Decision Date | 08 December 1969 |
| Docket Number | No. 24130,24130 |
| Parties | Catherine Constance HARRISON, Plaintiff-in-Error, v. Graydon Eugene HARRISON, Defendant-in-Error. |
| Court | Colorado Supreme Court |
Earl J. Hower, William M. Caldwell, Denver, for plaintiff in error.
No appearance for defendant in error.
Plaintiff in error, Catherine Constance Harrison, hereinafter referred to as 'Catherine,' seeks to reverse an order of the District Court of Jefferson County, Colorado, which awarded custody of her 3-year-old daughter Deona to defendant in error, Graydon Eugene Harrison, father of the child, hereinafter referred to as 'Graydon.'
A decree of divorce was awarded to Graydon on December 12, 1966. Catherine was given custody of the infant daughter, Deona, by agreement of the parties. Thereafter, in October of 1968, Graydon filed his Motion for Changing Custody and for Cessation of Support Payments, alleging that Catherine was unfit to have the further care, control and custody of Deona and that the child's best interests would be served by placing her in her father's custody. After an evidentiary hearing, at which six witnesses presented testimony concerning the character of the parties, their economic circumstances, and their capabilities to provide a suitable home for Deona, the court concluded that Catherine was not a fit and proper person to have the custody of the child and that the child's best interests required that she be placed with Graydon for at least a year, after which the matter of custody might be reviewed upon request of either party.
A petition for rehearing or new trial was filed and denied.
Counsel for Catherine urged reversal on the grounds that the court abused its discretion in awarding custody of Deona to Graydon under the circumstances of this case, particularly in view of the child's tender years. We do not agree, and therefore affirm the judgment of the trial court.
The question for our determination is whether there was sufficient evidence to support the trial court's judgment that the child's best interests under all the circumstances would best be served by the custody order entered herein. We find ample competent evidence to support the court's findings, which will not be disturbed on review in the absence of a showing of a gross abuse of discretion. Saucerman v. Saucerman, announced November 10, 1969, Colo., 461 P.2d 18; Kelley v. Kelley, 161 Colo. 486, 423 P.2d 315; Kane v. Kane, 154 Colo. 440, 391 P.2d 361; Averch v. Averch, 104 Colo. 365, 90...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Sebastian v. Sebastian
...v. Crowe (1946), 116 Ind.App. 534, 65 N.E.2d 645; see also McRight v. McRight (1984), Ala.Civ.App., 444 So.2d 869; Harrison v. Harrison (1969), 170 Colo. 397, 462 P.2d 119; Brown v. Goodloe (1960), 215 Ga. 755, 113 S.E.2d 393; Schmidt v. Schmidt (1952), 346 Ill.App. 436, 105 N.E.2d 117; Ric......
-
Bernick v. Bernick, 71--406
...to custody and visitation upon a showing of circumstances warranting a change in the best interests of the children. Harrison v. Harrison, 170 Colo. 397, 462 P.2d 119. On appellate review of such an order, every presumption will be made in favor of the validity of the trial court's decision......
-
Marriage of Adamson, In re
...are incident to custody orders and must further the best interests of the child. Section 14-10-129(2), C.R.S. 1973; Harrison v. Harrison, 170 Colo. 397, 462 P.2d 119 (1969); In re Marriage of McGee, Colo.App., 613 P.2d 348 (1980). A custodial parent must be given wide latitude in carrying o......
-
Berglund v. Berglund
...In an action for divorce where children are concerned, the court's basic concern must be for the welfare of the child. Harrison v. Harrison, Colo., 462 P.2d 119. In Broome v. Broome, Colo., 450 P.2d 642, the parties had entered into an agreement whereby the father was to pay $150.00 a month......