Title: Ford v. Ford

State: alabama

Issuer: Alabama Supreme Court

Document:

310 So. 2d 234 (1975)
In re Harriet C. FORD
v.
Gerald Lamar FORD. Ex parte Harriet C. Ford.
SC 1111.

Supreme Court of Alabama.
March 13, 1975.
Richard D. Lane, Auburn, James T. Gullage, Opelika, for petitioner.
No brief for respondent.
MERRILL, Justice.
The trial court denied a petition for modification of a decree of custody which granted the custody of a girl child to her father with the mother having the child on alternate weekends.
The Court of Civil Appeals considered three asserted errors and affirmed the decree of the trial court. 54 Ala.App. 510, 310 So. 2d 230.
Petitioner raises three points in her petition for writ of certiorari. Two are without merit, but the third raises a valid question but not one sufficiently prejudicial to require the granting of the writ of certiorari.
In its opinion, the Court of Civil Appeals states:
Petitioner correctly argues that the use of the word "adversely" limits the law as stated in our cases. The Ponder case, cited supra, does not contain the word "adversely," and the opinion in Ponder cites Greene v. Greene, 249 Ala. 155, 30 So. 2d 444. In Greene, this court quoted with approval a portion of a quotation from Stringfellow v. Somerville, 95 Va. 701, 29 S.E. 685, 40 L.R.A. 623, the latter part of which reads: "* * * the parent will not be permitted to reclaim the custody of the child, unless he can show that a change of the custody will materially promote his child's welfare." (Emphasis supplied).
The rule is correctly stated in Ponder, supra, as follows:
We approve the quoted paragraph from the opinion in the instant case with the omission of the word "adversely."
The opinion of the Court of Civil Appeals is corrected and the petition for writ of certiorari is denied.
Opinion corrected and writ denied.
HEFLIN, C. J., and MADDOX, JONES and SHORES, JJ., concur.