Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Advocates
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Advocates

Commonwealth ex rel. Sablosky v. Sablosky, Appellant.

Parent and child — Custody — Mother or father — Divorced parents — Best interests of children — Personal attention — Desires of children.

In a habeas corpus proceeding involving, as between divorced parents, the custody of their two children, aged seven and four, in which it appeared that both parents were devoted to and morally, physically, and financially able to care for the children; and that the trial judge found that the respondent father was required to leave his children in the care of a housekeeper and the informal ministrations of a neighbor during the time he was engaged in the practice of his profession, whereas the mother was not employed and could personally devote all of her attention to the care of the children, that the children both expressed a desire to be left with their mother, and that the best interests of the children required that custody be awarded to the mother; it was Held that the order of the court below should be affirmed.

Argued March 30, 1955.

OPINION BY WOODSIDE, J., July 21, 1955:

This is a heartbreaking contest between two divorced, devoted parents both morally, physically and financially able to care for two small children whose custody each seeks.

We heard the case first on a supersedeas which we granted because we thought the children's place of residence should not be changed during the school term.

On the merits we listened to two long arguments, ably presented, read the briefs, and carefully examined the entire record.

A majority of us have not been convinced that we should disturb the decision of the lower court. Judge MILLEN is thoroughly familiar with the parties and their situation. In his opinion he reviewed the evidence, applied the law, and set forth the reasons for the order which he made.

We affirm on the opinion of the court below.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

COMMONWEALTH ex rel. SABLOSKY v. SABLOSKY
(Jul 21, 1955)