Franks v. Franks
| Docket Number: | 2002-CA-01345-COA | |
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 05-11-2004 Opinion Author: Bridges, P.J. Holding: Affirmed |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Divorce: Adultery - Child custody Judge(s) Concurring: King, C.J., Southwick, P.J., Thomas, Lee, Irving, Myers, Chandler and Griffis, JJ. Procedural History: Bench Trial Nature of the Case: CIVIL - CUSTODY |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 07-15-2002 Appealed from: Lowndes County Chancery Court Judge: Dorothy W. Colom Disposition: JUDGMENT OF DIVORCE ENTERED AWARDING CUSTODY AND DIVIDING ASSETS. Case Number: 2001-0262 |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
| Appellant: | Kenneth Scott Franks |
GARY GOODWIN |
||
| Appellee: | Amanda J. Franks | JOSEPH N. STUDDARD CARRIE A. JOURDAN WILLIAM W. FULGHAM |
|
|
Synopsis provided by:  If you are interested in subscribing to the weekly synopses of all Mississippi Supreme Court and Court of Appeals hand downs please contact Tammy Upton in the MLI Press office. |
|
| Topic: | Divorce: Adultery - Child custody |
| Summary of the Facts: | Amanda Franks filed a complaint for divorce against Scott Franks seeking a divorce on the grounds of habitual cruel and inhuman treatment and habitual drunkenness. Scott filed a cross-claim for divorce on the grounds of habitual cruel and inhuman treatment and adultery. The chancellor granted Scott a divorce on the ground of adultery, and Amanda was awarded custody of the children subject to Scott’s visitation. Scott appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Scott argues that the court erred in awarding custody to Amanda. Factors the court should consider in awarding custody include age and sex of the child; continuity of care prior to the separation; parenting skills; employment; physical and emotional fitness and age of the parents; emotional ties of parent and child; moral fitness of parent; home, school and community record of the child; preference of the child at an age sufficient to express a preference by law; stability of the home environment; and other relevant factors. Scott’s argument that he should be granted custody of the son because they are both male is inconsistent with the evolution of custody standards. The allegations of who was the better caretaker and homemaker is a version of “he said,” “she said” and divination of the truth is better left to the judge sitting as the finder of fact. Scott did nothing to bolster an opinion of his parenting skills other than his more cooperative nature. Both Scott and Amanda have willing and able parents to help out, both have daycare arrangements and both work shift work. The finding by the chancellor that a consistent routine each week for the children, which they would have with their mom, was preferable is not manifestly wrong. Scott presents nothing that was not properly presented before the trial judge and adequately considered there. A review of the record supports the court’s finding that eight factors favored Amanda while only three favored Scott and that the chancellor properly considered the custody of the minor children in relation to the best interests of the children. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
