Powell v. Powell, 17297
| Court | United States State Supreme Court of South Carolina |
| Writing for the Court | W. G. Acker, Pickens; STUKES |
| Citation | 98 S.E.2d 764,231 S.C. 283 |
| Parties | Lois Williams POWELL, Respondent v. Dwayne POWELL, Appellant. |
| Docket Number | No. 17297,17297 |
| Decision Date | 30 May 1957 |
Page 764
v.
Dwayne POWELL, Appellant.
Julien D. Wyatt, Felix L. Finley, Jr., John T. Gentry, Pickens, for appellant.
[231 S.C. 284] W. G. Acker, Pickens, J. Wiley Brown, Greenville, for respondent.
STUKES, Chief Justice.
The respondent brought this action against appellant for divorce upon the ground of physical cruelty. Appellant answered and counterclaimed for divorce from the appellant upon the ground of her adultery. The custody of their daughter, who is now about three years old, was also an issue. The parties were each sixteen when they married.
A great deal of testimony was taken by the special referee, to whom the issues were referred, and he found against the contentions of respondent with respect to her alleged ground for divorce; and, on the contrary, that she was guilty of adultery which entitled appellant to divorce from her. He concluded further that in view of
Page 765
respondent's conduct and example, it would not be for the best interest of the child for her to be awarded custody of the latter. He [231 S.C. 285] found that appellant, the father of the child, plans to keep it at the home of his parents which will be a suitable place for it except that the house is small, which can be remedied by appellant and that will be his duty, within his means. Appellant's father owns the home. The referee recommended that the privilege of visiting her child at reasonable times be extended to respondent.Upon exceptions to the report it was sustained by the court except as to the custody of the child, wherein the referee was reversed and custody was awarded to respondent, except one week of each month when the child should visit appellant who was ordered to pay $12.50 per week for support of it, excluding the weeks when the child should be visiting with him.
Respondent did not appeal from the judgment that her action for divorce was dismissed and appellant granted divorce from her on the ground of her adultery. Thus she is an adjudicated adulteress. The appeal relates only to the provision of the decree with respect to the custody of the child.
The award of the custody of the child to respondent must be reversed. As found by the lower court upon the record, there is no perfect solution of the question of custody. However, appellant's moral character and personal habits are not seriously impeached by the evidence, and he was not found by the lower court to be unfit to have the custody of his child; he works and earns substantial wages, as does his father who is a well-paid foreman of long experience in a textile mill. The testimony of appellant's parents, in whose home he proposes to keep the child, is convincing that they are people of at least average...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Moore v. Moore, 17594
...respondent's right to the custody of her small child, if otherwise entitled as he found, and we affirm, her to be. Cf. Powell v. Powell, 231 S.C. 283, 98 S.E.2d 764, and cases Also argued under this question and made the subject of the sixth question is the following proffer of evidence in ......
-
Peay v. Peay, 19564
...consideration of the Court in all child custody controversies. Koon v. Koon, 203 S.C. 556, 28 S.E.2d 89 (1943); Powell v. Powell, 231 S.C. 283, 98 S.E.2d 764 (1957); Pullen v. Pullen, 253 S.C. 123, 169 S.E.2d 376 (1969). In many cases, this Court has applied what we refer to as the tender y......
-
Todd v. Todd, 18057
...in all controversies between parents over the custody of their minor children. Koon v. Koon, 203 S.C. 556, 28 S.E.2d 89; Powell v. Powell, 231 S.C. 283, 98 S.E.2d 764; Moore v. Moore, 235 S.C. 386, 111 S.E.2d 695; and Ex Parte Atkinson, 238 S.C. 521, 121 S.E.2d 4. Our statute, Section 31-51......
-
Ford v. Ford, 18066
...in all controversies between parents over the custody of their minor children. Koon v. Koon, 203 S.C. 556, 28 S.E.2d 89; Powell v. Powell, 231 S.C. 283, 98 S.E.2d 764; Moore v. Moore, 235 S.C. 386, 111 S.E.2d 695; and Ex Parte Atkinson, 238 S.C. 521, 121 S.E.2d 4. Our statute, Section 31-51......
-
Moore v. Moore, 17594
...respondent's right to the custody of her small child, if otherwise entitled as he found, and we affirm, her to be. Cf. Powell v. Powell, 231 S.C. 283, 98 S.E.2d 764, and cases Also argued under this question and made the subject of the sixth question is the following proffer of evidence in ......
-
Peay v. Peay, 19564
...consideration of the Court in all child custody controversies. Koon v. Koon, 203 S.C. 556, 28 S.E.2d 89 (1943); Powell v. Powell, 231 S.C. 283, 98 S.E.2d 764 (1957); Pullen v. Pullen, 253 S.C. 123, 169 S.E.2d 376 (1969). In many cases, this Court has applied what we refer to as the tender y......
-
Todd v. Todd, 18057
...in all controversies between parents over the custody of their minor children. Koon v. Koon, 203 S.C. 556, 28 S.E.2d 89; Powell v. Powell, 231 S.C. 283, 98 S.E.2d 764; Moore v. Moore, 235 S.C. 386, 111 S.E.2d 695; and Ex Parte Atkinson, 238 S.C. 521, 121 S.E.2d 4. Our statute, Section 31-51......
-
Ford v. Ford, 18066
...in all controversies between parents over the custody of their minor children. Koon v. Koon, 203 S.C. 556, 28 S.E.2d 89; Powell v. Powell, 231 S.C. 283, 98 S.E.2d 764; Moore v. Moore, 235 S.C. 386, 111 S.E.2d 695; and Ex Parte Atkinson, 238 S.C. 521, 121 S.E.2d 4. Our statute, Section 31-51......