Koones v. Koones

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Koones v. Koones

149 So. 2d 88

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJanuary 25, 1963

DocketNo. 3284

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 149 So. 2d 88 (Koones v. Koones) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Koones v. Koones, 149 So. 2d 88 (Fla. Ct. App. 1963).

Pincite

Opinion

ALLEN, Judge.

This is an appeal by the defendant wife from a final decree of divorce in 'which the lower court found, inter alia, the defendant guilty of adultery during her marriage to the plaintiff and not a fit and proper person to have the care, custody and control of the parties’ three minor children, a boy aged 6 and two girls ages 5)4 and 4 respectively. The lower court also found the plaintiff to be a proper parent and, in addition to granting him a divorce on the ground of adultery, also awarded him the custody of the three children, with reasonable visitation rights in the mother. The decree also dismissed the defendant’s counterclaim for divorce on the ground of extreme cruelty.

In this appeal the defendant is contesting only that part of the final decree which awarded the custody of the children to the plaintiff-husband.

The parties to this suit were originally married in 1952 and were divorced in August, 1960, after the wife deserted the marital home, her husband and children. The parties were remarried in December, 1960, and it is this marriage that was dissolved by the decree here appealed.

We have read the testimony adduced in this case and find the record replete with testimony as to the instances of the wife’s misconduct, both as to her relations with other men and her drinking habits-.

There is some conflict in the testimony as to the fitness of each of the parties as to the permanent care of the three children. Such conflicts are required to be determined by [89]*89the trial judge and an appellate court does not weigh the testimony of the witnesses. In this case a very able and revered circuit judge heard the testimony of the parties and decided it would be for the best interest of these children to be in the permanent care of the father.

We have read the testimony adduced below and concur in the determination of this cause by the lower court.

Affirmed.

KANNER, Acting C. J., and WHITE, J., concur.

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

ALLEN, Judge.

This is an appeal by the defendant wife from a final decree of divorce in 'which the lower court found, inter alia, the defendant guilty of adultery during her marriage to the plaintiff and not a fit and proper person to have the care, custody and control of the parties’ three minor children, a boy aged 6 and two girls ages 5)4 and 4 respectively. The lower court also found the plaintiff to be a proper parent and, in addition to granting him a divorce on the ground of adultery, also awarded him the custody of the three children, with reasonable visitation rights in the mother. The decree also dismissed the defendant’s counterclaim for divorce on the ground of extreme cruelty.

In this appeal the defendant is contesting only that part of the final decree which awarded the custody of the children to the plaintiff-husband.

The parties to this suit were originally married in 1952 and were divorced in August, 1960, after the wife deserted the marital home, her husband and children. The parties were remarried in December, 1960, and it is this marriage that was dissolved by the decree here appealed.

We have read the testimony adduced in this case and find the record replete with testimony as to the instances of the wife’s misconduct, both as to her relations with other men and her drinking habits-.

There is some conflict in the testimony as to the fitness of each of the parties as to the permanent care of the three children. Such conflicts are required to be determined by [89]*89the trial judge and an appellate court does not weigh the testimony of the witnesses. In this case a very able and revered circuit judge heard the testimony of the parties and decided it would be for the best interest of these children to be in the permanent care of the father.

We have read the testimony adduced below and concur in the determination of this cause by the lower court.

Affirmed.

KANNER, Acting C. J., and WHITE, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

149 So. 2d 88, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/koones-v-koones-fladistctapp-1963.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack