In re The Petition of Nettie Snook for A Writ of Habeas Corpus

• Decision Date: 10 November 1894
• Citation: 54 Kan. 219,38 P. 272
• Parties: In the matter of the Petition of NETTIE SNOOK for a Writ of Habeas Corpus
• Court: Kansas Supreme Court

38 P. 272

54 Kan. 219

In the matter of the Petition of NETTIE SNOOK for a Writ of Habeas Corpus

Supreme Court of Kansas

November 10, 1894

Decided July, 1894.

Original Proceeding in Habeas Corpus.

PETITION of Nettie Snook to obtain the custody of her infant daughter from Isaac V. Tissue and his wife. The facts appear in the opinion herein, filed November 10, 1894.

Application denied.

W. D Atkinson, and Call & Ingalls, for petitioner.

Welch & Wilson, for respondent.

JOHNSTON J. All the Justices concurring.

OPINION

JOHNSTON, J.:

This is a proceeding instituted by Nettie Snook, formerly Nettie Tissue, to obtain the custody of her infant daughter, Goldie C. Tissue, who is about five years of age, from Isaac V. and Cynthe Tissue, the paternal grandparents of the child. John Tissue, the father of Goldie, was killed in a railroad accident in December, 1889, and not long afterward the petitioner left the child with her grandparents, who have since provided for and treated her as their own child. The sum of $ 500 was paid by the railroad company for causing the death of' John Tissue, and the petitioner was appointed administratrix of the estate. Shortly afterward the petitioner intermarried with James Snook, and two children have been born from that marriage. More than two years ago Snook moved from Parsons to Argentine, where he obtained employment in a smelter, and the wages which he receives are $ 2 per day. Since their removal from Parsons, the petitioner has not visited Goldie, nor does it appear that she has corresponded with the Tissues concerning her. A short time ago; Nettie Snook was cited, as administratrix, to appear before the probate court of Labette county, and make a settlement of the estate in her charge. Some differences arose between the parties as to this settlement, and Nettie Snook then, for the first time, demanded the possession of Goldie, and that being denied, she brought this proceeding. In answer, the grandparents alleged that the petitioner abandoned the child when it was about 10 months of age, and since that time had refused to care for her, or provide anything for her support and maintenance. They state that since she was left with them they have cared for and treated her as their own child; that they have no one to support other than this child except one daughter 14 years of age; that they own property in the city of Parsons of the value of $ 2,000, and are able and willing to care for and educate Goldie, and will treat her as one of their own children. They further allege that the petitioner is an unfit person to rear the child, has not shown any interest in her welfare for the past two years, and is only moved now by a spirit of revenge to obtain her custody and give her to some other persons.

While the testimony does not show an absolute gift of the child to the grandparents, it tends strongly to sustain the claim that she was given to or left with them with the understanding that they would care for and raise her the same as their own child. Goldie has lived with them for three years or more, and during that time it is evident that she has received watchful care and attention. It is shown that while they are people of limited means, they possess a...