Payne v. Payne

Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama

Payne v. Payne

550 So. 2d 440, 1989 WL 92473

CourtCourt of Civil Appeals of Alabama

DecidedAugust 16, 1989

DocketCiv. 6927

StatusPublished

Cited by40 cases

This text of 550 So. 2d 440 (Payne v. Payne) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Payne v. Payne, 550 So. 2d 440, 1989 WL 92473 (Ala. Ct. App. 1989).

Pincite

Opinion

Plaintiff father and defendant mother were divorced for incompatibility. Custody of an infant child was granted to the father. The mother has appealed, asserting an abuse of discretion in the granting of child custody.

The judgment of the trial court in this case was entered upon oral testimony. In all such cases involving custody of a child, the judgment is accorded a presumption of correctness on appeal. This court will not disturb such judgment unless it is so without support in the evidence as to be clearly wrong or unjust. Myers v. Myers, 523 So.2d 413 (Ala.Civ.App. 1988).

We have closely considered the record of the evidence and the proceeding before the trial court. As is usual in such cases, there is wide disparity and dispute in the evidence. The judge below heard the evidence and observed the parties and witnesses. He exercised his judicial discretion in entering judgment. We perceive no precedential value in iterating the evidence here. It is sufficient to state that we find no abuse of discretion in the judgment. We must affirm it. Mansell v.Mansell, 437 So.2d 588 (Ala.Civ.App. 1983).

The foregoing opinion was prepared by Retired Appellate Judge L. CHARLES WRIGHT while serving on active duty status as a judge of this court under the provisions of section12-18-10(e), Code 1975, and this opinion is hereby adopted as that of the court.

AFFIRMED.

All the Judges concur. *Page 980

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

Plaintiff father and defendant mother were divorced for incompatibility. Custody of an infant child was granted to the father. The mother has appealed, asserting an abuse of discretion in the granting of child custody.

The judgment of the trial court in this case was entered upon oral testimony. In all such cases involving custody of a child, the judgment is accorded a presumption of correctness on appeal. This court will not disturb such judgment unless it is so without support in the evidence as to be clearly wrong or unjust. Myers v. Myers, 523 So.2d 413 (Ala.Civ.App. 1988).

We have closely considered the record of the evidence and the proceeding before the trial court. As is usual in such cases, there is wide disparity and dispute in the evidence. The judge below heard the evidence and observed the parties and witnesses. He exercised his judicial discretion in entering judgment. We perceive no precedential value in iterating the evidence here. It is sufficient to state that we find no abuse of discretion in the judgment. We must affirm it. Mansell v.Mansell, 437 So.2d 588 (Ala.Civ.App. 1983).

The foregoing opinion was prepared by Retired Appellate Judge L. CHARLES WRIGHT while serving on active duty status as a judge of this court under the provisions of section12-18-10(e), Code 1975, and this opinion is hereby adopted as that of the court.

AFFIRMED.

All the Judges concur. *Page 980

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

550 So. 2d 440, 1989 WL 92473, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/payne-v-payne-alacivapp-1989.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack