Maher v. Maher

Court of Appeals of Arizona

Maher v. Maher

495 P.2d 147, 17 Ariz. App. 22, 1972 Ariz. App. LEXIS 604

CourtCourt of Appeals of Arizona

DecidedMarch 30, 1972

DocketNo. 2 CA-CIV 1000

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 495 P.2d 147 (Maher v. Maher) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Arizona primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Maher v. Maher, 495 P.2d 147, 17 Ariz. App. 22, 1972 Ariz. App. LEXIS 604 (Ark. Ct. App. 1972).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This appeal requires that we consider the single question, whether the trial court erred in granting custody of the parties’' minor children, ages 4 and 7, to their mother. The sole basis for the alleged error is. that there is evidence showing that the-mother is unfit. We have considered the-entire record.

Viewing the evidence, as we must, in the-light most favorable to supporting the decree, we find that there is ample evidence-demonstrating that the mother was a fit and proper person to have custody. The record shows that she was a regular church-, goer and president of her Sunday school class. It further reveals that she is a good homemaker and is described as a “very good mother.” The children appear to be well-adjusted and in good circumstances in her custody.

We will not disturb the judgment on appeal unless it clearly appears that the - discretion of the trial court has been abused. Andro v. Andro, 97 Ariz. 302, 400 P.2d 105 (1965), rehearing denied, 98 Ariz. [23]*231, 401 P.2d 404 (1965); Ward v. Ward, 91 Ariz. 296, 371 P.2d 1022 (1962); Wackerman v. Wackerman, 16 Ariz.App. 382, 493 P.2d 928 (1 CA-CIV 1532, filed February 16, 1972). The record demonstrates ample evidence to support the judgment of the trial court, which we affirm.

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

PER CURIAM.

This appeal requires that we consider the single question, whether the trial court erred in granting custody of the parties’' minor children, ages 4 and 7, to their mother. The sole basis for the alleged error is. that there is evidence showing that the-mother is unfit. We have considered the-entire record.

Viewing the evidence, as we must, in the-light most favorable to supporting the decree, we find that there is ample evidence-demonstrating that the mother was a fit and proper person to have custody. The record shows that she was a regular church-, goer and president of her Sunday school class. It further reveals that she is a good homemaker and is described as a “very good mother.” The children appear to be well-adjusted and in good circumstances in her custody.

We will not disturb the judgment on appeal unless it clearly appears that the - discretion of the trial court has been abused. Andro v. Andro, 97 Ariz. 302, 400 P.2d 105 (1965), rehearing denied, 98 Ariz. [23]*231, 401 P.2d 404 (1965); Ward v. Ward, 91 Ariz. 296, 371 P.2d 1022 (1962); Wackerman v. Wackerman, 16 Ariz.App. 382, 493 P.2d 928 (1 CA-CIV 1532, filed February 16, 1972). The record demonstrates ample evidence to support the judgment of the trial court, which we affirm.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

495 P.2d 147, 17 Ariz. App. 22, 1972 Ariz. App. LEXIS 604, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/maher-v-maher-arizctapp-1972.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack