Lansdell v. Snoddy, 8 Div. 955
| Decision Date | 21 May 1959 |
| Docket Number | 8 Div. 955 |
| Citation | 113 So.2d 151,269 Ala. 344 |
| Court | Alabama Supreme Court |
| Parties | Mabel Sue Snoddy LANSDELL v. William Benton SNODDY. |
Jesse A. Keller, Florence, for appellant.
Potts & Young, Florence, for appellee.
William Benton Snoddy (appellee) filed his bill in the equity court in two aspects first to set aside and have the court declare void a decree rendered on August 27, 1957, which dissolved the marriage between himself and Mabel Sue Snoddy, now Mabel Sue Snoddy Lansdell (appellant), and second, to award the custody of the minor child of the parties, a five year old girl, to himself, appellee.
The decree of August 27, 1957, awarded custody of the child to the mother (appellant) but it is alleged in the second aspect of the bill that there has been a material change of circumstances since the rendition of the decree of divorce.
The court sustained the demurrer to the aspect of the bill which seeks to set aside the divorce decree on the ground of fraud and that feature of the case is not before this court on this appeal.
Testimony was heard on the second aspect of the case whith the result that the court rendered a decree which removed the custody of the child from the mother (appellant) and gave her custody to the father (appellee). This appeal is solely from the decree of the court awarding custody of the child to the appellee.
We have carefully considered the evidence in the case and do not find that there has been any material change in the circumstances since the decree of divorce was rendered, nor do we find any pertinent facts which existed at the time of the decree of divorce but which were not disclosed.
This court has consistently held that a former decree awarding custody of a minor child is conclusive of the interest of the child and the rights of the parents so long as the status at the time of the decree remains without material change unless pertinent facts existing but not disclosed at the time of the final decree are brought to light. Messick v. Messick, 261 Ala. 142, 73 So.2d 547; Sparks v. Sparks, 249 Ala. 352, 31 So.2d 313; White v. White, 247 Ala. 405, 24 So.2d 763.
The only change in the circumstances according to the evidence in the case is that the appellant has since remarried. Her present husband is Dee Lansdell. The proof shows that he is of kindly disposition, is good to the child and is amply able to provide a home not only for his present wife but also for the child. The mere fact that the wife has since remarried is not within itself such a material change in the circumstances as to cause a modification of the original decree. Wren v. Stutts, 258 Ala. 421, 63 So.2d 370; Ogle v. Ogle, 251 Ala. 623, 38 So.2d 864.
We accordingly conclude that there has been no material change in circumstances since the rendition of the original decree of divorce sufficient to justify a modification of that decree.
It is contended that in addition to the remarriage of the appellant to Dee Lansdell that prior to the divorce decree Mabel Sue Snoddy was going with her present husband without the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Ladden v. Ladden
...court was required to consider (1) evidence of the child's home life if the custodial parent had remarried, citing Lansdell v. Snoddy, 269 Ala. 344, 113 So.2d 151 (1959), and Raines v. Baucom, 270 Ala. 706, 708, 121 So.2d 870, 871 (1960); (2) evidence concerning the mother's supervision of ......
-
Travis v. Travis
...since the divorce. The original decree regarding support remains conclusive so long as there is no material change. Lansdell v. Snoddy, 269 Ala. 344, 113 So.2d 151 (1959); Buchanan v. Buchanan, 49 Ala.App. 528, 274 So.2d 84 Modification of a prior provision for child support in a divorce de......
-
Gould v. Gould
...of tender years, the mother is generally considered better fitted to exercise custody unless she is unfit for the trust. Lansdell v. Snoddy, 269 Ala. 344, 113 So.2d 151. And, finally, it is held in this state that a party seeking modification of a child custody provision of a divorce decree......
-
Hodges v. Nelson
...instant case, their welfare is presumed to be best served by placing custody in the mother unless she is found unfit. Lansdell v. Snoddy, 269 Ala. 344, 113 So.2d 151 (1959); Gould, supra. The party seeking to modify the custody provisions of the original decree has the burden of proving a s......