GEORGE C. ANDERSON, APPELLANT,
v.
PATSY R. ANDERSON, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
George Anderson appealed a divorce decree in which the trial court awarded his wife Patsy custody of their two minor children, child support, and nominal alimony after finding the equities in her favor based on her cross-complaint for mental cruelty. The appellate court affirmed, holding that the trial judge's factual findings were supported by substantial evidence and that custody could be awarded to the mother regardless of adultery findings if she proved to be a good mother.
The appellate court affirmed the trial court's decree, holding that the Chancellor's factual findings were supported by ample competent and substantial evidence. The court held that a mother could be awarded custody of minor children even if found guilty of adultery, provided the record sufficiently convinced the trial court that she was a good mother. Here, the Chancellor did not find the wife guilty of adultery and implicitly found her to be a good mother.
“This was strictly a fact case, and the able Chancellor resolved all conflicts in the evidence and made findings and conclusions which find their source in ample competent, substantial evidence.”
Establishes the standard of review—that appellate courts defer to trial judges' factual findings when supported by substantial evidence.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceGeorge Anderson filed for divorce from Patsy Anderson in Polk County Circuit Court, alleging adultery and mental cruelty as grounds and seeking custod…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Adultery As Grounds For Divorce cases and more on FLexlaw
This is an appeal by George C. Anderson from a final decree and a post-decretal order entered in a divorce decree in the Court below.
Anderson filed suit in the Polk County Circuit Court against his then wife, Patsy R. Anderson, asking for a divorce and custody of their two minor children, alleging as grounds therefor adultery and mental cruelty. Defendant wife counterclaimed on the ground of mental cruelty, asking the same relief plus alimony, support money for the children, and attorney’s fees.
Testimony was taken before the Chancellor personally upon the issues so made up, resulting in a final decree being entered finding “that the equities of this cause are with the Defendant, Patsy R. Anderson, and are against the Plaintiff, George C. Anderson, and that the Defendant has proven the allegations of her Cross-Complaint by competent evidence”. The decree thereupon awarded her a divorce, and custody of their two minor children, aged 4 years and 2 years respectively, an amount for child support, and also “the sum of $1.00 per year as alimony”. The decree was entered on June 1st, 1966; and on August 23, 1966, upon stipulation of the parties, the Court entered order eliminating the payment of alimony as directed by the decree. Plaintiff appeals here and assigns as error entry of the decree and the findings contained therein. We affirm.
This was strictly a fact case, and the able Chancellor resolved all conflicts in the evidence and made findings and conclusions which find their source in ample competent, substantial evidence. The former husband contends that the evidence proved his wife was guilty of adultery. This is just another way of saying that he does not approve the Chancellor’s findings, which hardly makes them legally wrong. As a matter of fact, the final decree could have proceeded from no other conclusion except that the Chancellor did not believe she was guilty of adultery.
He found the equities to be in her favor and against her husband. He found she had proven the allegations of her cross-complaint. He awarded her alimony, albeit in a nominal sum, which is non-allowable to an adulterous wife. And as to custody of the children, she could have been awarded such custody even if the Court had found her guilty of adultery, provided the record sufficiently convinced the Chancellor that she was a good mother. We have just had occasion, in McAnespie v. McAnespie, Fla.App.1967, 200 So.2d 606, after an extensive review of the authorities, to make this very holding. But it is unnecessary to invoke McAnespie here because the Chancellor did not make such finding — rather to the contrary. The final decree and post-decretal order appealed from are affirmed.
ALLEN, Acting C. J., and HOBSON, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Dinkel v. Dinkel, 322 So. 2d 22 (Fla. 1975)…y proceeding, the welfare of the child is the prime consideration. Green v. Green, supra. Although a spouse has committed adultery, it may nonetheless be in the best interest of the child that custody be awarded to that spouse. Anderson v. Anderson, 205 So. 2d 341 (Fla.App. 2nd, 1967). As stated in McAnespie v. McAnespie, 200 So. 2d 606, (Fla.App. 2nd, 1957): “The fact that a mother is guilty of adultery does not necessarily disqualify her to have the custody of her children. Although she may have been a bad…
-
Chandler v. Chandler, 230 So. 2d 723 (Fla. 2d DCA 1970)…inor children to the wife-appellee on the basis of Simmons v. Simmons, Fla. 1936, 122 Fla. 325, 165 So. 45; Bennett v. Bennett, Fla.App.1962, 146 So. 2d 588; McAnespie v. McAnespie, Fla.App. 1967, 200 So. 2d 606; Anderson v. Anderson, Fla.App. 1967, 205 So. 2d 341. We therefore reverse the trial judge in his finding that there was legal condonation. We also reverse the trial judge’s award of alimony to the wife and we affirm custody of the minor children in the wife. Reversed in part and affirmed in part.…
Authorities Cited
- McANESPIE v. McANESPIE, 200 So. 2d 606 (Fla. 2d DCA 1967)