Ex Parte Sloan. Stanley v. Vinson

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Ex Parte Sloan. Stanley v. Vinson

1931 OK 29, 296 P. 398, 147 Okla. 164, 1931 Okla. LEXIS 737

CourtSupreme Court of Oklahoma

DecidedFebruary 3, 1931

Docket19553

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 1931 OK 29 (Ex Parte Sloan. Stanley v. Vinson) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Oklahoma primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Ex Parte Sloan. Stanley v. Vinson, 1931 OK 29, 296 P. 398, 147 Okla. 164, 1931 Okla. LEXIS 737 (Okla. 1931).

Pincite

Opinion

ANDREWS, J.

Mrs. Wood Stanley, the *165 mother of Samuel Norvell Sloan, a minor, instituted a proceeding in the county court of Rogers county against S. C. Vinson, Bess Vinson, and Van R. Sloan. After a hearing was had on the response to the writ issued by that court, that court made its order on the 7th day of October, 1927, denying the prajter of the petition and remanding the minor, Samuel Norvell Sloan, to the care, custody, and control of S. C. Vinson, and discharging the writ of habeas corpus theretofore issued'. From that order an appeal was taken to this court by Mrs. Wood Stanley.

Under the state of the record there is but one question before this court, and that is, What will best subserve the interest of the child? Bishop et al. v. Benear, 132 Okla. 116, 270 Pac. 569. This court in this sort of proceeding has the jurisdiction to determine that question. Brooks v. Preston, 134 Okla. 273, 273 Pac. 345, and cases therein cited.

The parties to this appeal have filed herein a stipulation calling attention to a change in conditions occurring since the trials and in which they agree that under the circumstances as they now exist, as set out in the stipulation, it is for the best interest of the minor that the “custody of said minor shall he confided to his adopted' father, S. O. Vinson, during the school months of each year, and during the vacation the custody of said child shall be given to the plaintiff in error, Mrs. Joe Foster, formerly Mrs. Wood Stanley, and that the defendant in error. S. G. Vinson, has paid the sum of $35 toward the costs in both the county court and this court and that the balance of the costs of this proceeding shall be paid bv the plaintiff in error. Mrs. Wood Stanley.”

From the record in this ease and the stipulation, it appears to this court that the best interest of the minor, Samuel Norvell Sloan, requires that the custody of said minor be confided to S. G. Vinson, his adopted father, during the school months of each year, and during the vacation the custody of said child should be given to the plaintiff in error. Mrs. .Toe Foster, formerly Mrs. Wood Stanley, and that the costs of this proceeding should be taxed and paid in accordance with tire terms of the stipulation.

The judgment of the county court of Rogers county, Okla.. is reversed, and the cause is remanded to that court, with directions to enter its judgment in conformity herewith.

LESTER. O. J.. CLARK. V. C. J., and RILEX, HEFNER, OULLISON, SWIN-DALL, and MeNEILL, JJ., concur. KORN-EGAX, J., not participating.

Note. — See under (1) 12 R. C. L. p. 1215; R. C. L. Perm. Supp. p. 3283; R. C. L. Continuing Perm. Supp. p. 501.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

ANDREWS, J.

Mrs. Wood Stanley, the *165 mother of Samuel Norvell Sloan, a minor, instituted a proceeding in the county court of Rogers county against S. C. Vinson, Bess Vinson, and Van R. Sloan. After a hearing was had on the response to the writ issued by that court, that court made its order on the 7th day of October, 1927, denying the prajter of the petition and remanding the minor, Samuel Norvell Sloan, to the care, custody, and control of S. C. Vinson, and discharging the writ of habeas corpus theretofore issued'. From that order an appeal was taken to this court by Mrs. Wood Stanley.

Under the state of the record there is but one question before this court, and that is, What will best subserve the interest of the child? Bishop et al. v. Benear, 132 Okla. 116, 270 Pac. 569. This court in this sort of proceeding has the jurisdiction to determine that question. Brooks v. Preston, 134 Okla. 273, 273 Pac. 345, and cases therein cited.

The parties to this appeal have filed herein a stipulation calling attention to a change in conditions occurring since the trials and in which they agree that under the circumstances as they now exist, as set out in the stipulation, it is for the best interest of the minor that the “custody of said minor shall he confided to his adopted' father, S. O. Vinson, during the school months of each year, and during the vacation the custody of said child shall be given to the plaintiff in error, Mrs. Joe Foster, formerly Mrs. Wood Stanley, and that the defendant in error. S. G. Vinson, has paid the sum of $35 toward the costs in both the county court and this court and that the balance of the costs of this proceeding shall be paid bv the plaintiff in error. Mrs. Wood Stanley.”

From the record in this ease and the stipulation, it appears to this court that the best interest of the minor, Samuel Norvell Sloan, requires that the custody of said minor be confided to S. G. Vinson, his adopted father, during the school months of each year, and during the vacation the custody of said child should be given to the plaintiff in error. Mrs. .Toe Foster, formerly Mrs. Wood Stanley, and that the costs of this proceeding should be taxed and paid in accordance with tire terms of the stipulation.

The judgment of the county court of Rogers county, Okla.. is reversed, and the cause is remanded to that court, with directions to enter its judgment in conformity herewith.

LESTER. O. J.. CLARK. V. C. J., and RILEX, HEFNER, OULLISON, SWIN-DALL, and MeNEILL, JJ., concur. KORN-EGAX, J., not participating.

Note. — See under (1) 12 R. C. L. p. 1215; R. C. L. Perm. Supp. p. 3283; R. C. L. Continuing Perm. Supp. p. 501.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1931 OK 29, 296 P. 398, 147 Okla. 164, 1931 Okla. LEXIS 737, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ex-parte-sloan-stanley-v-vinson-okla-1931.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack