Court Opinion

ID: 9508290
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-06 21:30:12.140116+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:07:30.593882
License: Public Domain

MR. JUSTICE MORRISON,
dissenting:
I believe the majority opinion in this case is but a further example of this Court’s substituting its judgment for that of the trial court and/or the jury. The trial court is in the best position to observe the demeanor of the witnesses and thereby acquire a feel for their credibility and even their character, which no cold record can possibly convey. Only the trial judge is in a sound position to decide matters of custody.
The majority opinion seeks to reverse the lower court’s discretion by finding inadequacies in the court’s findings. The majority’s approach is unrealistic. Many trial judges in this state operate without the benefit of law clerks. The volume of their work precludes making findings on every conceivable statutory guideline. The majority’s approach can most accurately be characterized as nit-picking.
I would affirm the judgment of the District Court.