Opinion ID: 1669017
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Did the chancellor commit manifest error in assigning more weight to the testimony of appellee than to the testimony of appellant when the testimony of appellant provided the court with more consistent and credible evidence?

Text: The lower court ordered appellant to have the child in court for the contempt hearing. She appeared without him but produced a note purportedly written by the boy to the effect that he did not want to come to court and declined to do so. Appellee filed a motion to dismiss because of failure to perform the order. The court took same under advisement and later overruled it. The appellant next contends that the lower court erred in assigning more weight to the testimony of appellee than to that of appellant and that the testimony of appellant was more consistent and more credible. We have examined the record pertaining to those two assignments of error and are of the opinion that there is no merit in them.