Morgan v. Shelly
| Decision Date | 23 October 1916 |
| Citation | 111 Miss. 868,72 So. 700 |
| Court | Mississippi Supreme Court |
| Parties | MORGAN v. SHELLY |
October 1916
APPEAL from the circuit court of Attala county, HON. J. A. TEAT Judge.
Petition by A. L. Shelly for a writ of habeas corpus against Mary Morgan and others, seeking the custody of his minor son. From a judgment for petitioner, defendants appeal.
The facts are fully stated in the opinion of the court.
Judgment reversed.
O. A Luckett and T. P. Guyton, for appellants.
G. L. Teat, for appellee.
The appellee, A. L. Shelly, sued out a writ of habeas corpus before the circuit judge in Attala county seeking the custody of his minor son, Gus Shelly, twelve years of age, then in the care and custody of the appellants, Mary Morgan, and her husband, Joe Morgan. The petition for the writ alleged that the petitioner was the father and natural guardian of the minor, Gus Shelly, that he was a suitable person and well able to care for the child, and that it would be to the best interest of the child that it be awarded to him by the court. The appellants, Mary Morgan and her husband answered the petition for the writ. At the hearing of the cause before the circuit judge, the appellants introduced conclusive evidence, showing the following facts, to wit: Mrs. A. L. Shelly, the wife of the appellee, and the mother of little Gus Shelly, here in controversy, died a few days after the birth of Gus, and before she died she called to her bedside the appellant Mary Morgan, a relative, who was then a single lady, eighteen years of age, and asked her to take her baby and care for him as her own until he was grown. Mary Morgan agreed to do this, and did take the child when it was but a few days old, and nursed and cared for it as a devoted mother for twelve years, until this writ of habeas corpus was served upon her in an effort to deprive her of the custody of the boy. When the child was about fourteen days old its father, the appellee here, gave the custody of it to the appellant Mary Morgan, and told her that he could not and would not endeavor to raise it, and that she could have it for all time to come. From that time on until the child was twelve years old, the father did not visit it, and, it appears from the testimony, did not even know this child from any other child during the twelve years, and that the father did not contribute anything to its support during this time, except on one occasion he gave the boy a pair of overalls, a whip, and a pocketknife, but so far as bestowing upon the child any attention, affection, or fatherly assistance, this record shows that he did nothing in this regard, but that he...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Fourths v. Warren
...life that to separate them now would be cold, heartless, and cruel and contrary to the law of the State of Mississippi. Morgan v. Shelly, 111 Miss. 868, 72 So. 700; Hayes v. Morgan, 164 So. 880; McAdams McFerron, 178 So. 333. We think that under Section 1864 of the Code of 1930 that this ch......
-
McAdams v. McFerron
...the child was such as to grant the court the right to award the custody of the child as was done in that case. In the case of Morgan v. Shelley, 111 Miss. 868, the father who seeking the custody of the child had for twelve years not visited the child nor contributed to its support and did n......
-
Governale v. Haley, 40066
...to and protected it during such period of desertion. McShan v. McShan, 56 Miss. 413; Fullilove v. Banks, 62 Miss. 11; Morgan v. Shelly, 111 Miss. 868, 72 So. 700. Such conduct conclusively rebuts and overthrows the legal presumption that the welfare of the child would, other things being eq......
-
Mayfield v. Braund, 38741
...So. 709; McAdams v. McFerron, 180 Miss. 644, 178 So. 333; McShan v. McShan, 56 Miss. 413; Fullilove v. Banks, 62 Miss. 11; Morgan v. Shelly, 111 Miss. 868, 72 So. 700; Foster v. Alston, 6 How. 406; Cocke v. Hannum, 39 Miss. 423. But after a careful study of these texts and cases we are unab......