Opinion ID: 1956315
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Alleged Trial Court Reliance Upon Improper Presumptions

Text: Appellant maintains that the trial court improperly accorded presumptive significance to the factors of motherhood and physical possession of the child in determining the question of future custody. We disagree. Neither the oral ruling of the judge nor the court's written findings of fact and conclusions of law reflect an express or implied reliance upon the fact that Mrs. Moore was the child's mother, or that she had actual possession of Jessica for most of the period between her departure from the family home and the trial. The court's mere inclusion of the relevant fact that the child had resided with the mother except for a brief period of time, for most of the child's life, does not indicate that it was a dispositive or even influential consideration, or, as appellant contends, that the court believed either maternity or present physical possession was presumptively significant to the custody determination. In summary, it does not appear that the trial court in fact employed either of the allegedly improper presumptions in determining the issues of the suit. [2]