Pierce v. Pierce

Citations

• 52 Wash. 679
• 101 P. 358
• 1909 Wash. LEXIS 1175

Syllabus

<p>Divorce — Judgment—Modification—Diligence in Applying — Custody of Children — Fitness of Parties. Allegations as to unfitness of the wife to have the custody of children by reason of immoral acts prior to the trial of the divorce case, unknown to the husband at that time, are properly struck from a petition to modify a decree of divorce as to such custody, where the only showing of diligence was the bare allegation that the husband was unable by the exercise of reasonable diligence to procure any evidence of the matters, and he had delayed for two years in applying for modification of the decree.</p> <p>Same. The right of a divorced party to the custody of children must depend upon present moral conduct and the welfare of the children; not upon past delinquencies.</p> <p>Appeal — Record. Where the evidence is not brought up, it will be presumed to support the findings.</p> <p>Appeal — Review—Burden of Showing Error. Error in striking part of a pleading will not be presumed, and is cured by receiving evidence on the point.</p> <p>Appeal — Record—-Divorce—Custody of Children. Error cannot be predicated upon awarding the custody of children without providing that they may be visited by a parent, wnere the evidence is not brought up on appeal.</p>