Court Opinion

ID: 9562171
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-21 18:23:01.875537+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:17:14.403628
License: Public Domain

Hill, J.
(dissenting) — I dissent. The basis of my dissent is well stated in an excerpt from Chatwood v. Chatwood, 44 Wn.2d 233, 240, 266 P.2d 782 (1954), quoted in part on page 459 of the majority opinion.
Trial courts must necessarily be allowed broad discretion in custody matters, because so many of the factors to be considered can be more accurately evaluated by the trial judge, who has the distinct advantage of seeing and hearing witnesses, and is in a better position to determine their credibility, than the members of an appellate court, who have access only to the printed record on appeal, and to the briefs and argument of counsel.
In the instant case, the significant evidence of the contending parties is in absolute conflict. If we were the triers of fact and were making an initial determination here, we might very well decide in favor of the appellant’s contentions. A decision depriving this mother of the custody of her minor daughter certainly is not an easy one. It is difficult and disturbing, and we are reluctant to reach that result. However, considering the situation in this case as it was presented to the trial court, and the fact that it has been presented to that court and a decision reached, and considering all that we have said hereinbefore, it is our best judgment that the custody disposition made by the trial court in this case should not *462be disturbed. The judgment is in all respects hereby affirmed.[1]
I would affirm the trial court.
July 25, 1968. Petition for rehearing denied.

1 Quoted and followed in Silverton v. Silverton, 71 Wn.2d 276, 277, 427 P.2d 1001 (1967).