Kearney v. Blue, 17934
| Decision Date | 17 September 1956 |
| Docket Number | No. 17934,17934 |
| Citation | 301 P.2d 515,134 Colo. 217 |
| Parties | Raymond KEARNEY, Plaintiff in Error, v. Stella Kearney BLUE, Defendant in Error. |
| Court | Colorado Supreme Court |
Galligan & Foley, Denver, for plaintiff in error.
L. E. F. Talkington, Denver, for defendant in error.
April 11, 1949, Stella Kearney, now defendant in error, signed and filed a petition in dependency in the juvenile court of the city and county of Denver. A copy of this petition is not reflected in the record. It is stated by counsel for plaintiff in error that this original petition was in the interest of, and concerned with, Gregory Kearney, born on the 26th day of November, 1946, and an unborn child. This statement of counsel is supported by a copy of the summons issued therein on April 28, 1949 captioned:
"In The Matter of the People in the
Interest of
"Gregory Kearney ...................... Dependent
Unborn child ........................ Dependent
"Upon the Petition of
"Stella Kearney ...................... Petitioner
"and Concerning
"Raymond Kearney ..................... Respondent "
The petition for dependency reflected in the record before us is undoubtedly an amended petition, because in the petition it relates not only Gregory Kearney, above mentioned, born the 26th day of November, 1946, but in addition thereto it names as dependents Jeneanne Kearney, born October 19, 1949, which would be five months after the date of the original petition and summons, and also includes Douglas Kearney, born October 3, 1950, and Lois Kathleen Kearney, born March 7, 1952. It is stated therein that on November 15, 1955 the original petition was amended to show that the petitioner had remarried and is known as Stella Blue.
Following the filing of what we assume to be the original petition, and on the 28th day of April 1949, the juvenile court entered an order declaring Gregory Kearney and the unborn child dependents and wards of the juvenile court and placed the custody in the petitioner, and further ordered that the father, Raymond Kearney, be required to pay $80 per month into the registry of the court for child support. After the uninterrupted contingency of the birth of another child the petition was amended to include the latest offspring, which amendments were made on February 14, 1952, and May 15, 1952, to include the name of the mentioned unborn child. At a hearing before a referee of the juvenile court on August 28, 1952, it was found that Stella Kearney and Raymond Kearney, petitioner and respondent, were separated, and at that time an additional award of $90 each two weeks was made, and the petition, apparently upon suggestion, and nothing else, was amended without any formalities of the statutes upon each new arrival in this unrestrained effort for perpetuation of the race.
This is an instance where the juvenile court, through its referee, was supervising the family life of petitioner and respondent and assumed the difficult task of the family budgeting. We must bear in mind that the petition is captioned 'Petition in Dependency' and not 'Petition Involving Contributing to Dependents.' To act upon this petition or any amendments thereto nothing could be determined except that the child or children involved are dependent and neglected children, chapter 22, article 1, C.R.S. '53, and such a petition can only be filed in behalf of the state. Everett v. Barry, 127 Colo. 34, ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
McCall v. District Court In and For Montezuma County, 82SA266
...the interest of the child in neglect and dependency actions. Wellbrink v. Walden, 142 Colo. 102, 349 P.2d 697 (1960); Kearney v. Blue, 134 Colo. 217, 301 P.2d 515 (1956); Carrera v. Kelley, 131 Colo. 421, 283 P.2d 162 (1955); Everett v. Barry, 127 Colo. 34, 252 P.2d 826 (1953); People in th......
-
City and County of Denver v. District Court of Second Judicial Dist., 83SA412
...this court has recognized that juvenile courts ordinarily do not have jurisdiction to determine custody disputes. Kearney v. Blue, 134 Colo. 217, 301 P.2d 515 (1956). Section 19-1-104(5) of the Children's Code expressly addresses one aspect of the inevitable conflict which arises from the f......
-
People in Interest of Baby Girl D.
...S. S. T., 38 Colo.App. 110, 553 P.2d 82 (1976). This is equally so with reference to the filing of required pleadings. Kearney v. Blue, 134 Colo. 217, 301 P.2d 515 (1956). Because a new hearing must be conducted relative to termination of the mother's rights in compliance with the statutory......
-
People In Interest of R.E., 85CA1662
...of marriage action, and the juvenile court has no jurisdiction over the matter. See Johnson v. Black, supra; Kearney v. Blue, 134 Colo. 217, 301 P.2d 515 (1956); cf. § 19-1-104(6), C.R.S. (1978 Repl.Vol. A hearing is thus necessary here to clarify what matters need to be resolved, and wheth......
-
ARTICLE 3 DEPENDENCY AND NEGLECT
...in dependency proceeding under former section, husband and wife, had continued to live together over the years involved. Kearney v. Blue, 134 Colo. 217, 301 P.2d 515 (1956). The mere act of dismissing the petition does not decree custody of the child, for custody in dependency cases can onl......
-
ARTICLE 1 GENERAL PROVISIONS
...within the classification of a dependent or neglected child becomes a ward of the state and the state can intervene. Kearney v. Blue, 134 Colo. 217, 301 P.2d 515 (1956). "Legal custodian" does not encompass a state agency or employee thereof to which a delinquent child has been committed. P......
-
ARTICLE 3
...in dependency proceeding under former section, husband and wife, had continued to live together over the years involved. Kearney v. Blue, 134 Colo. 217, 301 P.2d 515 (1956). The mere act of dismissing the petition does not decree custody of the child, for custody in dependency cases can onl......
-
ARTICLE 1
...within the classification of a dependent or neglected child becomes a ward of the state and the state can intervene. Kearney v. Blue, 134 Colo. 217, 301 P.2d 515 (1956). "Legal custodian" does not encompass a state agency or employee thereof to which a delinquent child has been committed. P......