Paynter v. Smith

Decision Date18 February 1972
Citation481 S.W.2d 270
PartiesJuanita PAYNTER, Appellant, v. Louis SMITH et al., Appellees.
CourtUnited States State Supreme Court — District of Kentucky

Donald L. Wood, Fox, Wood & Wood, Maysville, for appellant.

John H. Clarke, Jr., Clarke & Clarke, Maysville, for appellees.

CATINNA, Commissioner.

Juanita Paynter appeals from a judgment awarding the custody of her eight-year-old daughter, Susan Jo Paynter, to Louis Smith and Grace Smith, great-uncle and great-aunt of Susan Jo Paynter.

Jerry Paynter, after his marriage to Juanita, got a job on the Smoot Dairy Farm and moved into a tenant house located on the farm. Louis Smith was also employed on the farm, he and his wife Grace living in an adjoining tenant house. Grace Smith was an aunt of Jerry Paynter.

When the Paynters' first child, Susan Jo, was born the Smiths rendered them almost daily assistance. Some fourteen months later a second child, a son, was born. Susan Jo was cared for by the Smiths in their home during the days that followed. The son became ill requiring extensive medical care and rest. Susan Jo then became a permanent resident of the Smith home, residing there from the time she was fourteen months old until the present. Susan Jo visited her parents infrequently, the visits in most instances being limited to an occasional weekend. Her parents, or one of them, visited her on the average of three to four times a year.

No effort was made by the Paynters to contribute toward the support of Susan Jo. Their contributions were modest presents at Christmas, on birthdays, and an occasional dress. Nothing was ever paid to the Smiths to help pay the costs of maintaining Susan Jo.

After the birth of the second child, the Paynters moved from the Smoot farm, leaving Susan Jo with the Smiths. Jerry held several jobs in various sections of Kentucky and Ohio, eventually settling at Georgetown, Ohio, where he and Juanita purchased a home.

Shortly after moving to Georgetown, Ohio, Jerry began exhibiting abnormal sexual conduct, dressing in female clothes. Domestic difficulties developed, and a divorce action was filed by Juanita in the Court of Common Pleas, Brown County, Ohio. Both parties were represented by counsel. A judgment was entered on May 10, 1971, granting Juanita a divorce and awarding her custody of the two children, Susan Jo Paynter and Jerry Wayne Paynter, Jr. Jerry was ordered to pay Juanita the sum of $12 per week for the support of each child while they were in her physical custody and possession. Susan Jo was not in Ohio at any time during the divorce proceeding, but remained with the Smiths on the Smoot farm in Mason County, Kentucky.

On the same day, May 10, 1971, Juanita journeyed to the Smith home and demanded custody of Susan Jo and was refused. On May 11 she filed her petition for a writ of habeas corpus in the Mason Circuit Court. On May 24, 1971, Louis Smith and Grace Smith filed a 'Complaint to Secure Custody of Minor Child.' No responsive pleadings were filed by any of the parties; however, the father, Jerry Paynter, did file a pleading entering his appearance and requesting the court to grant custody of Susan Jo to the Smiths. The two proceedings were consolidated for the purpose of trial.

Evidence introduced at the trial pictured Juanita Paynter as irresponsible and careless, a very poor housekeeper who seldom washed dishes or cooking utensils, allowing dirty dishes and bits of food to accumulate until the food was spoiled to the extent that it had decomposed. She allowed dirty clothes to accumulate in closets to a depth of 2 1/2 feet, as well as in the corners of the rooms. She would buy new clothes rather than wash the dirty ones. She neglected to care for dirty diapers so that when they were washed bits of solid human waste would be found in the tub of the washing machine. Her house was always dirty to the extent of being filthy, and there was such an odor that it would make a person sick.

Juanita did not belong to a church, nor regularly attend any church. She did not take the boy to church because sometimes she worked on Sunday.

Witnesses also testified that Juanita was a good housekeeper and an attentive mother.

Juanita no longer keeps house as she now lives with her mother and father, along with two adult brothers, in a home kept and maintained by them.

Louis Smith and Grace Smith are pictured as hard-working Christian people. Louis had worked on the Smoot farm for some twenty-five years, was in charge of a dairy herd, and the owner of a portion of the dairy stock. They are members of the Minerva Methodist Church, and Susan Jo participates in the activity of the church. Grace belongs to the Minerva Garden Club and is active in community affairs. The Smiths are deeply in love with Susan Jo, she appearing to be the very center of their life.

Susan Jo is pictured as being happy and well adjusted in the Smith home, having a good and healthy relationship with the Smiths and other people in the community....

To continue reading

Request your trial
3 cases
  • Greathouse v. Shreve
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court — District of Kentucky
    • 19 Enero 1995
    ...extended period of time. In such a case the best interest or welfare of the child becomes the paramount consideration. See Paynter v. Smith, Ky., 481 S.W.2d 270 (1972); Shaw v. Graham, Ky., 310 S.W.2d 522 (1958); Rose v. Ledford, 306 Ky. 662, 208 S.W.2d 957 (1948); Bridges v. Matthews, 276 ......
  • Cox v. Bramblet
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court — District of Kentucky
    • 16 Marzo 1973
    ...the child, could have left her with the Coxes, who are fine people. Horn v. Dreschel, 298 Ky. 427, 183 S.W.2d 22 (1944); Paynter v. Smith, Ky., 481 S.W.2d 270 (1972). Whether we would have reached the same conclusion as the chancellor did is not the question--it is whether we consider the f......
  • Woodrum v. Dunn
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court — District of Kentucky
    • 15 Febrero 1974
    ...best interests, the status should not be disturbed, provided the legal rights of the parties may be preserved .' See also, Paynter v. Smith, Ky., 481 S.W.2d 270 (1972). George Eliot had Silas Marner say the same thing more succinctly: 'When a man turns a blessing from his door, it falls to ......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT