State ex rel. Airston v. Bollinger

Citations

• 88 Fla. 123
• 101 So. 282

Syllabus

<p>1. Under the common law an agreement whereby the father seeks to transfer the custody of his minor child to another, is contrary t'o public policy' and may be revoked by a parent, who- may recover the custody of his child on writ of habeas corpus.</p> <p>2. It is the general American rule that agreements by parents, for the transfer to others of the custody of their children are against public -policy and- are not binding on the parties.</p> <p>3. An agreement by which the father surrenders the custody of his child, is not binding; he is at liberty to revoke his consent afterwards and obtain the child by writ of habeas corpus.</p> <p>4. The father owes a duty to nurture, support, educate and protect his child, and the child has the right to call on him for the discharge of this duty. These obligations and rights are imposed and conferred by the laws of nature; and public policy for the good of society, will not permit or allow the father to irrevocably divest himself of 'or to abandon them at his mere will or pleasure.</p> <p>5. A parent will not be held to have surrendered the custody and control of his child permanently to a stranger, unless it clearly appears that such was his intention; and it will be presumed that the surrender of the custody of the child by his parent is intended t’o be temporary, unless the contrary clearly appears.</p> <p>G. It is not sufficient that the person having temporary custody of the child understood that the parent had granted to him permanent custody; but it must be clear that there was a corresponding understanding on the part of the parent.</p> <p>7. The statutes of Florida that permit a parent t’o part with his children by apprenticeship, adoption and guardianship, imply that it can be done in no other mode.</p>