State ex rel. Kearney v. Steel

Citations

• 121 La. 215
• 46 So. 215
• 1908 La. LEXIS 658

Syllabus

<p>1. Parent and Child — Custody oe Child.</p> <p>A widow, who by reason of her necessitous circumstances at the time places her little son in the care and custody of its paternal grandmother, and leaves him with her for several years, does not thereby forfeit her right to reclaim her child when she comes later to better fortune. Her act in so leaving the child did not imply a promise on her part never to retake him.</p> <p>[Ed. Note. — For cases in point, see Cent. Dig. vol. 37, Parent and Child, §§ 4-32.]</p> <p>2. Same — Evidence.</p> <p>The mere fact that the child is happy and contented where he has been placed, and even shows a greater present affection for his grandmother than for his mother, does not warrant a judge in refusing to recognize the rights of the mother to the care and custody of the child. No reason has been adduced in this case for ignoring the mother’s rights, other than the supposed happiness of the child arising out of the situation. A judge has some discretion over the subject of the care and custody of children; but it had to be exercised on more solid and substantial grounds than those which were advanced in this case.</p> <p>[Ed. Note. — For cases in point, see Cent. Dig. vol. 37, Parent and Child, §§ 4r-32.]</p> <p>(Syllabus by the Court.)</p>