Pittman v. Pittman

• Decision Date: 24 July 1943
• Citation: 14 So.2d 671,153 Fla. 434
• Court: Florida Supreme Court
• Parties: PITTMAN v. PITTMAN.

14 So.2d 671

153 Fla. 434

PITTMAN v. PITTMAN.

Florida Supreme Court

July 24, 1943

Rehearing Denied Nov. 2, 1943.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Dade County; Ross Williams, Judge.

William J Pruitt, of Miami, for appellant.

Sydney L Weintraub, of Miami, for appellee.

TERRELL, Justice.

Appellee sued appellant for divorce on the ground of desertion. He also prayed that he be awarded the custody of their minor child Charles Joseph Pittman, about five years old. The appellant answered the bill of complaint wherein she denied the material allegations thereof and prayed that the custody of their minor child be awarded to her mother, Mrs. Mae Ritzema. On final hearing, the Chancellor granted the complainant his divorce and awarded the custody of the minor child to him to be boarded in the home of his sister Mrs. Jim Willie Lowry. The defendant was denied the right to visit the child at any time. This appeal is from the final decree.

On consideration of the record, we think the final decree may be affirmed as to the divorce, but as to the custody of the minor child and the visitation of it by the mother (defendant), it should be reversed. It is shown that these parties were married in Alabama in 1936, lived the hawk and buzzard way from scratch separated repeatedly and neither showed a disposition to make a go of the marital state. They turned the child over to its maternal grandmother before it was eight months old and she and her husband kept it until this suit was brought.

This Court has repeatedly approved the doctrine that when confronted with the question of awarding the custody of a minor child, it will be guided by what is shown to be the best interest of the child. The chancellor awarded the custody of the child to the father to be boarded with his sister in Miami, who is shown to be a very respectable lady but a stranger to it. At the time he made this award, he was faced with the alternative of awarding it to the grandmother, who is shown to be a law-abiding, religious, God-fearing person who owns and lives on a modest farm with the grandfather near Wauchula, Florida, who voluntarily took it as an infant and have been solely responsible for its nurture and support. They have become attached to it and are willing to continue that responsibility.

Now if the interest of the child is the first consideration in awarding its custody, as between a stranger, though a very respectable lady, and the grandmother, who is equally as respectable and has shown her devotion to it, the question of what is the best interest of the child would not seem difficult to answer. The prospect of growing up in a modest farm home tutored by a law-abiding, intelligent, religious guardian is one of the greatest opportunities that ever fell athwart the path of a five year old boy. Its potentialities far surpass those of living in a boarding house even though it be operated by Emily Post next door to Utopia.

The modest farm home is the natural sanctuary and breeding ground for democratic theory as we understand it. To grow to maturity on a modest farm, to have frequent...