Wright v. Price, 4 Div. 684.

Decision Date13 April 1933
Docket Number4 Div. 684.
Citation147 So. 886,226 Ala. 591
CourtAlabama Supreme Court

Rehearing Denied May 18, 1933.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Houston County; H. A. Pearce, Judge.

Habeas corpus proceeding for the custody of a child by Nancy Price against Reuben Wright. From a judgment or decree for petitioner, respondent appeals.

Reversed rendered, and remanded.

See also, 147 So. 675.

O. S Lewis, of Dothan, for appellant.

Halstead & Halstead, of Headland, for appellee.

ANDERSON Chief Justice.

This case involves the right to the custody of a minor child between the grandmother on the father's side and a brother of the child's deceased mother. There is no material dispute as to the facts, the substance of which is set out by the reporter.

We are in accord with the expression of the learned trial Judge, "the matter is one of exceeding delicacy and great responsibility," and only wish that we had the wisdom of King Solomon who first dealt with a controversy of this character so as to be able to solve the problem so convincingly correct as was done by him, but, not being endowed with his wisdom, we can only do our best to reach the right result in applying the law to the facts in hand.

We are also in accord with the trial judge in the statement "It is not the interest of the grandmother, not that of the uncle, but the best interests of the child and its present and future welfare that is the question of prime importance for the solution of the court. Nor is the question of comparison of financial ability a matter of controlling influence, though, of course, to be given some consideration in connection with the ability of the parties to properly care for the child. If financial ability alone is the question of prime importance or of controlling influence, the conclusion would be favorable to the respondent." It was therefore conceded that the uncle, the respondent, could give the child better advantages as to home, comforts and higher education, as well as a prospective inheritance, and, with other things being equal, this fact should be of some moment. Apart from this, however, and excluding sentimental reasons to some extent, we are of the opinion that there are other matters in favor of the uncle. He and his wife are childless and the indications are will have no children, and this child will be the center and undivided object of their care and affection. They both bear...

To continue reading

Request your trial
18 cases
  • Stringer's Estate, In re
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Wyoming
    • August 18, 1959
    ...in the evidence, but in this case there is no conflict, and therefore nothing upon which to base this general presumption. Wright v. Price, 226 Ala. 591, 147 So. 886.' The Alabama courts have been consistent in following the rule in the Barnes case, supra. See Haden v. Boykin, 259 Ala. 504,......
  • Chandler v. Whatley
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Alabama
    • May 18, 1939
    ...225 Ala. 139, 142 So. 30; Ellis v. Jones, 208 Ala. 45, 93 So. 832; McDaniel v. Youngblood, 201 Ala. 260, 77 So. 674; Wright v. Price, 226 Ala. 591, 147 So. 886; Fletcher v. Preston et al., 226 Ala. 665, 148 137. This does not imply that in dealing with such delicate and often difficult ques......
  • Weems v. Weems
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Alabama
    • November 24, 1950
    ...while working in a field. Considering the age of the children, their wishes in the matter are entitled to much weight. Wright v. Price, 226 Ala. 591, 147 So. 886; Chandler v. Whatley, 238 Ala. 206, 189 So. 751; Hill v. Gay, The testimony in the case is without conflict that John S. Weems, t......
  • Morrison v. State ex rel. Dormon
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Alabama
    • October 14, 1948
    ...... v. STATE ex rel. DORMON, Deputy Solicitor. 7 Div. 955.Supreme Court of AlabamaOctober 14, 1948 . ... that, as a part of the purchase price, he traded an old car. which his father had given him, and ...651, 151 So. 586, [251 Ala. 291] 90 A.L.R. 637; Wright v. Price,. 226 Ala. 591, 147 So. 886. . . As. ......
  • 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