Court Opinion

ID: 9655847
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-23 19:23:35.885757+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:13:22.495142
License: Public Domain

Becker, J.
I respectfully dissent from Divisions VIÍ and VIII of the majority .opinion. It seems inconceivable that a case of this magnitude was heard without a court reporter to make a record of the evidence. It is equally strange that this court should note that omission and withhold adverse comment. Be *381that as it may, I can agree that plaintiff’s failure to require a record, plus her acceptance of the benefit of the decree, effectively precludes her successful attack on the judgment of the trial court insofar as it affects her alone.
Divisions VII and VIII deal with custody of the minor child. The de novo appeal in this regard goes beyond the rights of the adult litigants. We are expected to decide anew this vital issue re the welfare of the minor on a silent record. This should not be done.
At the very least this case should be returned to the trial court with instructions to conduct a hearing to determine the right to custody of Sandra based on the welfare and best interest of the child. Needless as it may appear to be, the order should include instructions to make a record of the evidence produced at such a hearing. Only thus can the judgments of the trial court, and of this court, merit the respect to which they should, be entitled.
.. The majority mentions the continuing jurisdiction to change the custodial arrangement when a change of ci/rcumst anees’ renders a change expedient. What does this mean when there is no record of the evidence on which the decision was based in the first instance?
More important, we are awarding custody in a contested matter with absolutely no knowledge of the factual situation involved. This places us in an untenable position. Further, it will place the California courts in an equally untenable position when they are faced, as they almost surely will be, with the problem of full faith and credit. These custodial problems are too important to be handled in such summary fashion.
The child here is entitled to our solicitous concern — to our decision based on reasonably accurate information. This court and any court faced with a decision by this court are both entitled to all the tools of their profession. This includes a reasonable record showing the factual evidence in the case.
I would remand for further proceedings, including a record.
Stuart, Mason and Rawlings, JJ., join in this dissent.