From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Cammack v. Cammack

Supreme Court of California.Department Two
Nov 27, 1928
205 Cal. 674 (Cal. 1928)

Opinion

Docket No. L.A. 9514.

November 27, 1928.

APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County denying motion for custody of minor children. Walton J. Wood, Judge. Affirmed.

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

E.H. Woodard and Otto A. Gerth for Appellant.

John E. Manders, Miller Thornton and Rolla Bishop Watt for Respondent.


This is an appeal by the defendant from an order denying his application to have the care, custody, and control of Frank Strawn, aged ten, and Mary Jane, aged eight, the minor children of the parties, transferred from the plaintiff, their mother, to the defendant. [1] The appeal is based upon the contention of the defendant that the evidence is insufficient to support the conclusion of the trial court that the mother is a fit and proper person to have the custody of her children.

The order was discretionary and may not be set aside except for an abuse of discretion. A review of the record discloses that the evidence was sufficient to support the order and that the trial court was properly guided by the considerations prescribed by section 246 of the Civil Code. No abuse of discretion is shown.

The judgment is affirmed.

Richards, J., and Langdon, J., concurred.


Summaries of

Cammack v. Cammack

Supreme Court of California.Department Two
Nov 27, 1928
205 Cal. 674 (Cal. 1928)
Case details for

Cammack v. Cammack

Case Details

Full title:KATE S. CAMMACK, Respondent, v. FRED R. CAMMACK, Appellant

Court:Supreme Court of California.Department Two

Date published: Nov 27, 1928

Citations

205 Cal. 674 (Cal. 1928)
272 P. 288

Citing Cases

Wilson v. Wilson

The children are a girl and a boy aged six and four years respectively. While presumptively a mother is…

Baldwin v. Baldwin

The trial court has a wide discretion in awarding the custody of children and unless it clearly appears that…