Rippere v. Rippere
| Decision Date | 12 April 1965 |
| Docket Number | No. 20533,20533 |
| Citation | 157 Colo. 29,400 P.2d 920 |
| Parties | Ann Miller RIPPERE, Plaintiff in Error, v. Kenneth H. RIPPERE, Defendant in Error. |
| Court | Colorado Supreme Court |
Bradley, Carney & Johnson, Golden, for plaintiff in error.
Lyle E. Miller, Golden, for defendant in error.
The sole issue posed by this writ of error is the propriety of an order of the trial court that the custody of a two-year-old boy be awarded the child's paternal grandparents.
Ann Rippere, as plaintiff, sought a divorce from her husband, Kenneth Rippere, on the grounds of extreme and repeated acts of cruelty, and in connection therewith prayed for the custody of their minor child. By answer the defendant asked, among other things, that he be given the custody of their child.
Upon hearing the plaintiff was granted a noncontested decree in divorce and in connection therewith the trial court ordered that the custody and control of the minor child of the parties be awarded the child's paternal grandparents who reside in New Jersey. By the present writ of error the plaintiff seeks reversal of this judgment as it pertains to the custody of the child.
To characterize this custody hearing as being merely one which was hotly contested is to indulge in unwarranted hyperbole. Without going into any of the acrimonious detail, it is sufficient to say that it was the plaintiff's basic contention in the trial court that she was indeed a fit person to be given the custody of her child and that her husband, on the contrary, was not. The defendant, in turn, contended that Ann was totally unfit to rear the child and that he was. As already suggested, at the conclusion of the custody hearing the trial court found that neither Ann nor Kenneth was a fit and proper person to be awarded the custody of their child. Thereupon, the trial court--out of the clear blue sky--proceeded to award the custody of the child to Kenneth's parents, who were not even at the hearing and who resided in New Jersey.
Although not conceding that she is in fact an 'unfit' mother, the plaintiff concedes that there was some evidence to that effect and that the trial court's finding that she was 'unfit' is a factual determination which on review cannot be successfully challenged. What Ann does complain about, however, is that there is no evidence whatsoever in the record which would in anywise justify placing the custody and control of her child in the paternal grandparents in New...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Custody of C.C.R.S., In re
...against parental interests was well established in Colorado prior to the adoption of the Dissolution Act in 1971. See Rippere v. Rippere, 157 Colo. 29, 400 P.2d 920 (1965); Root v. Allen, 151 Colo. 311, 377 P.2d 117 (1962); Walcott v. Walcott, 139 Colo. 37, 336 P.2d 298 In 1971, the Colorad......
-
Abrams v. Connolly, 88SC98
...nonparent. E.g., Root, 151 Colo. 311, 377 P.2d 117; Coulter v. Coulter, 141 Colo. 237, 347 P.2d 492 (1959); see also Rippere v. Rippere, 157 Colo. 29, 400 P.2d 920 (1965). Upon the death of a divorced custodial parent, therefore, the district court retains authority to enter further orders ......
-
Marriage of Trouth, In re
...refuse to award custody to either parent and may award custody to some one other than a natural parent of the child." Rippere v. Rippere, 157 Colo. 29, 400 P.2d 920 (1965). See Coulter v. Coulter, 141 Colo. 237, 347 P.2d 492 (1959); Walcott v. Walcott, 139 Colo. 37, 336 P.2d 298 The Act doe......
-
Smith v. Smith
...the doctrine that the paramount consideration in awarding custody of children is the best interest of the child itself. Rippere v. Rippere, 157 Colo. 29, 400 P.2d 920. The enactment of 1969 Perm.Supp. C.R.S. 1963, 46--1--5(7), which provides, Inter alia, 'In any action for divorce or in any......
-
ARTICLE 10
...and may award custody to someone other than a natural parent of the child and even to a nonresident of the state. Rippere v. Rippere, 157 Colo. 29, 400 P.2d 920 (1965). In determining the best interests of the child, the court must consider all relevant factors, including those enumerated i......
-
ARTICLE 10 UNIFORM DISSOLUTION OF MARRIAGE ACT
...and may award custody to someone other than a natural parent of the child and even to a nonresident of the state. Rippere v. Rippere, 157 Colo. 29, 400 P.2d 920 (1965). In determining the best interests of the child, the court must consider all relevant factors, including those enumerated i......