Gorham v. Gorham

354 So. 2d 655, 1977 La. App. LEXIS 4839
CourtLouisiana Court of Appeal
DecidedDecember 28, 1977
DocketNo. 11713
StatusPublished

This text of 354 So. 2d 655 (Gorham v. Gorham) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Louisiana Court of Appeal primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Gorham v. Gorham, 354 So. 2d 655, 1977 La. App. LEXIS 4839 (La. Ct. App. 1977).

Opinion

PONDER, Judge.

Plaintiff appealed from the denial of a change of custody of a minor child.

The issues are the burden to be borne by one seeking a change of custody; the claimed abuse of the court’s discretion and the constitutionality of the maternal preference rule.

We affirm.

The defendant was awarded custody of the minor children in a divorce granted in Florida. Only one child, now eight years old, is involved in these proceedings, the others having reached maturity.

Plaintiff first asserts that the “double burden”,1 should not have been imposed since the Florida decree was not a “considered” one.

[656]*656It is true that the lower court spoke in terms of the custody having been set and the necessity to show a change for the better on the one part and for the worse on the other part. We held recently in McCarstle v. McCarstle (1st Cir. 1977) that the best interest of the child was the main consideration, and that a heavy burden was demanded of one who seeks to change custody, relying upon Monsour v. Monsour, La., 347 So.2d 203 (1977); Estes v. Estes, 261 La. 20, 258 So.2d 857 (1972); and Fulco v. Fulco, 259 La. 1122, 254 So.2d 603 (1971).

The lower court examined the welfare of the child quite thoroughly despite the reference to the double burden and concluded that the child’s long term welfare was best served by continuing the custody in the mother even though temporarily his welfare might be best served by allowing the father temporary custody. This finding is entitled to great weight; it will not be disturbed in the absence of a clear showing of abuse. We find no abuse.

The plaintiff also contends that the lower court applied the maternal preference rule, and that this rule is unconstitutional. We find no evidence that the court applied the rule. At any rate, since the plaintiff failed to raise this issue at the trial, he cannot raise it on appeal. Summerell v. Phillips, 258 La. 587, 247 So.2d 542 (1971) and Greer v. Greer, 346 So.2d 846 (La.App. 1st Cir. 1977), writs refused September 30, 1977.

The judgment is affirmed. The plaintiff is cast with all costs of this appeal.

JUDGMENT AFFIRMED.

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

Related

Estes v. Estes
258 So. 2d 857 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 1972)
Monsour v. Monsour
347 So. 2d 203 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 1977)
Fulco v. Fulco
254 So. 2d 603 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 1971)
Decker v. Landry
80 So. 2d 91 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 1955)
Greer v. Greer
346 So. 2d 846 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 1977)
Summerell v. Phillips
247 So. 2d 542 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 1971)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
354 So. 2d 655, 1977 La. App. LEXIS 4839, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gorham-v-gorham-lactapp-1977.