In re Snead

New Jersey Court of Chancery

In re Snead

2 N.J. Misc. 418, 1924 N.J. Ch. LEXIS 176

DecidedJune 9, 1924

StatusPublished

This text of 2 N.J. Misc. 418 (In re Snead) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New Jersey Court of Chancery primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

In re Snead, 2 N.J. Misc. 418, 1924 N.J. Ch. LEXIS 176 (N.J. Ct. App. 1924).

Pincite

Opinion

Buchanan, Y. C.

Edward T. Snead, father of John Snead, a boy fourteen years of age, seeks the custody of his son, who ran away to [419]*419the home of Harrison Snead, an elder brother, aged twenty-six. .Resistance is made on the ground that the father keeps the boy from school, and overworks and underfeeds him. The testimony in this regard was not deniel by the father, and it is obvious that the boy has had but the most meagre school attendance, though he does not show much evidence of under-nourishment.

I think the boy’s welfare would best be served by awarding his custody to the respondent, who is sending him to school and Sunday school, and willing to undertake the responsibility of bis bringing up. I am, however, inclined to think he will be better off, after the close of the school, on the farm than here in the city, and the order may provide for possession to be given to the father during the school summer vacation, provided bond of one thousand dollars ($1,000) be given conditioned for the return of the. boy in September, and further conditioned to protect the boy from overwork and under-nourishment during the summer.

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

Buchanan, Y. C.

Edward T. Snead, father of John Snead, a boy fourteen years of age, seeks the custody of his son, who ran away to [419]*419the home of Harrison Snead, an elder brother, aged twenty-six. .Resistance is made on the ground that the father keeps the boy from school, and overworks and underfeeds him. The testimony in this regard was not deniel by the father, and it is obvious that the boy has had but the most meagre school attendance, though he does not show much evidence of under-nourishment.

I think the boy’s welfare would best be served by awarding his custody to the respondent, who is sending him to school and Sunday school, and willing to undertake the responsibility of bis bringing up. I am, however, inclined to think he will be better off, after the close of the school, on the farm than here in the city, and the order may provide for possession to be given to the father during the school summer vacation, provided bond of one thousand dollars ($1,000) be given conditioned for the return of the. boy in September, and further conditioned to protect the boy from overwork and under-nourishment during the summer.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

2 N.J. Misc. 418, 1924 N.J. Ch. LEXIS 176, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-snead-njch-1924.