Land v. Wrobel, 22591
| Decision Date | 28 September 1964 |
| Docket Number | No. 22591,22591 |
| Citation | 220 Ga. 260,138 S.E.2d 315 |
| Parties | Lois LAND v. Estelle WROBEL. |
| Court | Georgia Supreme Court |
H. G. Rawls, D. C. Campbell, Jr., Albany, for plaintiff in error.
Smith, Gardner, Kelley & Wiggins, Morton M. Wiggins, Jr., Albany, for defendant in error.
Syllabus Opinion by the Court
This is a habeas corpus action brought by the mother to obtain custody of her ten year old son. The pertinent facts are: on March 18, 1957, the child's mother and father were divorced; prior to the divorce, in January, 1957, they entered into an agreement, subsequently made an order of the court, under which the father was to have custody of the child with the right of the mother 'to visit the child at any time she desires and to have the child visit her at any time and to have said child in her home for visits.' The mother remarried March 26, 1957, and the father remarried in 1959. Then, in 1964 the father died. In this action the mother seeks custody of the child as against the stepmother (the father's widow). The stepmother's answer set out that the mother had abandoned the child and had relinquished custody under the divorce agreement.
Upon the hearing, evidence was introduced which showed that both the contestants were fit, proper and able to care for and rear the child. There was evidence that after the divorce the mother moved to Alaska with her husband, an Air Force sergeant, and remained there for four years without exercising her visitation privileges. However, the mother testified that she did send the child presents at Christmas and birthday gifts, and explained that she was unable to come such a great distance. After her sojourn in Alaska the mother visited with the child on several different occasions while she resided in New Jersey, her present abode. The trial judge granted custody to the mother and the stepmother excepted and assigns error to that judgment on the grounds that it was 'contrary to law and the evidence in the case, in that the uncontradicted evidence * * * demanded a finding by the court that it would be to the best interest, welfare and happiness of the child involved, to remand his custody to the defendant * * *' Held:
...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Spitz v. Holland, 34238
...give only a limited discretion to a trial judge where a parent and a third person are disputing the custody of a child. Land v. Wrobel, 220 Ga. 260, 138 S.E.2d 315 (1964). After further consideration of the issue we adhere to the former ruling of this court that a habeas corpus proceeding t......
- Vickers v. Vickers, 22580
-
Cross v. Ivester, A12A0318.
... ... 766]he owed about $40,000 on it and that it has no value because the land is disintegrating and falling apart. Cross also testified that he rented out an apartment in the ... ...
-
Canning v. Evans
...See Miele v. Gregory, 248 Ga. 93(2), 281 S.E.2d 565 (1981); Wright v. Hanson, 248 Ga. 523(2), 283 S.E.2d 882 (1981); Land v. Wrobel, 220 Ga. 260, 138 S.E.2d 315 (1964); and Code Ann. § 74-106. Generally, a third party (i.e., aunt and uncle, grandparents, etc.) has no legal right to custody ......
-
The Door Opens Wider: the Rights of Non-biological Parents to Claim Custody Just Expanded
...556 (2021).66. Id. at 721-22, 865 S.E.2d at 557.67. Id. at 722, 865 S.E.2d at 558.68. Id.69. Id. Teasley relied upon Land v. Wrobel, 220 Ga. 260, 138 S.E.2d 315 (1964), wherein the Georgia Supreme Court held that the mother, rather than the grandmother, was entitled to custody and control o......