Sparkman v. Sparkman, 54520

Decision Date14 December 1983
Docket NumberNo. 54520,54520
PartiesVelma M. SPARKMAN v. John Robert SPARKMAN.
CourtMississippi Supreme Court

Charles H. Ramberg, Samuel L. Walters, Jackson, for appellant.

No brief for appellee.

Before PATTERSON, C.J., and HAWKINS and ROBERTSON, JJ.

HAWKINS, Justice, for the Court:

Valma M. Sparkman appeals from a decree of the Chancery Court of the First Judicial District of Hinds County awarding custody of her son to the father, John Robert Sparkman. Finding the Chancellor erred, we reverse and render.

Valma M. Sparkman and John Robert Sparkman, Blacks, married May 19, 1974. Meakil Sparkman, a boy, and Rujuhnda, a girl, ages six and three respectively at the time of trial in June, 1982, were born to the marital union. Valma and John Robert separated in October, 1981, and her complaint for divorce was filed in April, 1982, charging habitual, cruel and inhuman treatment.

John Robert cross-complained charging adultery. At a temporary hearing prior to trial, the Chancellor permitted the boy to remain with the father and the girl to remain with the mother.

At the divorce hearing, John Robert testified he had moved to Indianapolis, IN, where he was employed. Meakil stayed with John's sister, who had an apartment and a 12-year-old son, during the day.

Valma was also employed at a local day care center and their daughter was kept at another day care center while she worked.

Following trial, the Chancellor awarded custody of the little girl to Valma and the boy to John Robert, with each parent, upon paying the traveling expense, having the right to one month's visitation during the summer of the child in the other's custody.

Valma challenges the decree insofar as it awarded custody of the boy to John Robert.

John Robert has filed no brief and made no appearance.

In an ordinary case, such failure would be tantamount to a confession of error by the appellee, and in and of itself it would justify our reversing and rendering judgment for the appellant. See Burt v. Duckworth, 206 So.2d 850 (Miss.1968), and Lawler v. Moran, 245 Miss. 301, 148 So.2d 198 (1963). This is a child custody case, however, and we examine further.

This Court has never adopted any per se rule to the effect that children should not be separated, in the absence of a showing of absolute necessity for the child's welfare. See the following cases for the rule in Florida: Collier v. Collier, 384 So.2d 697 (Fla.App.1980) and Doane v. Doane, 330 So.2d 753 (Fla.1976). The above rule comes from Arons v. Arons, 94 So.2d 849 (Fla.1957).

We did state, however, in Mixon v. Bullard, 217 So.2d 28 (Miss.1968) albeit by dicta:

The Court shall in all cases attempt insofar as possible, to keep the children together in a family unit. It is well recognized...

To continue reading

Request your trial
42 cases
  • Muhammad v. Muhammad, 92-CA-470
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Mississippi
    • August 5, 1993
    ...child custody is at issue, the Court is compelled to review the record, despite a failure to file a brief by Debra. Sparkman v. Sparkman, 441 So.2d 1361, 1362 (Miss.1983); Garceau v. Roberts, 363 So.2d 249, 250 A. Religious Freedom Robert contends that the chancellor violated his constituti......
  • Copeland v. Copeland, 2003-CA-02090-SCT.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Mississippi
    • December 16, 2004
    ...of siblings will be served by keeping them together. Sellers v. Sellers, 638 So.2d 481, 484 (Miss.1994) (citing Sparkman v. Sparkman, 441 So.2d 1361, 1362 (Miss.1983)). ¶ 44. Based upon this detailed analysis, the chancellor concluded that the best interest of the child dictated that he rem......
  • Bell v. Bell, 89-CA-1108
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Mississippi
    • October 3, 1990
    ...custody of minor children hardly reflect a policy of encouraging separation of siblings. The contrary is the fact. Sparkman v. Sparkman, 441 So.2d 1361, 1362-63 (Miss.1983); see also Mixon v. Bullard, 217 So.2d 28, 30-31 (Miss.1968). The record of proceedings below makes clear that the Cour......
  • Snow Lake Shores Property Owners Corp. v. Smith, 90-CA-0225
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Mississippi
    • December 10, 1992
    ...error." Burt v. Duckworth, 206 So.2d 850, 853 (Miss.1968). See also Queen v. Queen, 551 So.2d 197, 199 (Miss.1989); Sparkman v. Sparkman, 441 So.2d 1361, 1362 (Miss.1983); State v. Maples, 402 So.2d 350, 353 (Miss.1981). This rule is reaffirmed in today's The chancellor found that Snow Lake......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

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