Scripter v. Scripter

Nebraska Supreme Court

Scripter v. Scripter

208 N.W.2d 85, 190 Neb. 317, 1973 Neb. LEXIS 692

CourtNebraska Supreme Court

DecidedJune 1, 1973

Docket38867

StatusPublished

Cited by6 cases

This text of 208 N.W.2d 85 (Scripter v. Scripter) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Nebraska Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Scripter v. Scripter, 208 N.W.2d 85, 190 Neb. 317, 1973 Neb. LEXIS 692 (Neb. 1973).

Pincite

Opinion

Newton, J.

This is an appeal from the denial of an application for a change of custody of a minor child. We affirm the judgment entered.

Following the entry of a decree of 'divorce and the granting of custody of the child to' defendant, plaintiff appealed! to this court. See Scripter v. Scripter, 188 Neb. 576, 198 N. W. 2d 201. At that time this court found: “The evidence showed that the plaintiff suffers from rheumatism and arthritis in her left knee and spine, and calcium deposits in her lower back. She was hospitalized for an undisclosed reason for a period of 10 days shortly before the trial. She had! previously done baby sitting, but testified that she was physically unable to perform baby sitting or to take care of children, and that she had been advised by her doctor not to perform any work and to stay off her feet as much as possible. In addition, the evidence showed1 a continuous state of untidiness in plaintiff’s home, either through plaintiff’s physical incapacity or for other reasons. In contrast defendant is healthy, is regularly employed, and appears energetic and resourceful.”

Plaintiff maintains that her'health is now satisfactory and her home -.adequate. There is no evidence to support a finding of defendant’s unfitness to retain custody. We do not believe it is in the best interests of a child to unnecessarily change custody and bandy the child back and- forth between parents. Stability is desirable. There has not been such a change of circumstances here as would justify a finding that the best interests of the child again require a change in custody.

“An original decree fixing custody of minor children will not be modified unless there has been a change *319 in circumstances indicating that the person having custody is unfit for that purpose or that the best interests of the child require such action.” Packett v. Packett, 184 Neb. 769, 172 N. W. 2d 86.

The judgment of the District Court is affirmed.

Affirmed.

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

Newton, J.

This is an appeal from the denial of an application for a change of custody of a minor child. We affirm the judgment entered.

Following the entry of a decree of 'divorce and the granting of custody of the child to' defendant, plaintiff appealed! to this court. See Scripter v. Scripter, 188 Neb. 576, 198 N. W. 2d 201. At that time this court found: “The evidence showed that the plaintiff suffers from rheumatism and arthritis in her left knee and spine, and calcium deposits in her lower back. She was hospitalized for an undisclosed reason for a period of 10 days shortly before the trial. She had! previously done baby sitting, but testified that she was physically unable to perform baby sitting or to take care of children, and that she had been advised by her doctor not to perform any work and to stay off her feet as much as possible. In addition, the evidence showed1 a continuous state of untidiness in plaintiff’s home, either through plaintiff’s physical incapacity or for other reasons. In contrast defendant is healthy, is regularly employed, and appears energetic and resourceful.”

Plaintiff maintains that her'health is now satisfactory and her home -.adequate. There is no evidence to support a finding of defendant’s unfitness to retain custody. We do not believe it is in the best interests of a child to unnecessarily change custody and bandy the child back and- forth between parents. Stability is desirable. There has not been such a change of circumstances here as would justify a finding that the best interests of the child again require a change in custody.

“An original decree fixing custody of minor children will not be modified unless there has been a change *319 in circumstances indicating that the person having custody is unfit for that purpose or that the best interests of the child require such action.” Packett v. Packett, 184 Neb. 769, 172 N. W. 2d 86.

The judgment of the District Court is affirmed.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

208 N.W.2d 85, 190 Neb. 317, 1973 Neb. LEXIS 692, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/scripter-v-scripter-neb-1973.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack