Opinion

Mullen v. Mullen

  • 188 Va. 259
  • 49 S.E.2d 349
  • 1948 Va. LEXIS 163
Court
Supreme Court of Virginia
Filed
Sep 8, 1948
Status
Published
Author
Staples
On the bench
Buchanan, Eggleston, Gregory, Hudgins, Spratley, Staples
Cited by
70 cases

“In Virginia, we have established the rule that the welfare of the infant is the primary, paramount, and controlling consideration of the court in all controversies between parents over the custody of their minor children. All other matters are subordinate.”

How later courts described this case

  • “In Virginia, we have established the rule that the welfare of the infant is the primary, paramount, and controlling consideration of the court in all controversies between parents over the custody of their minor children. All other matters are subordinate.”
  • “In Virginia, we have established the rule that the welfare of the infant is the primary, paramount and controlling consideration of the court in all controversies between parents over custody of their minor children.”

Written by the judges who cited it.

The opinion

Staples, J.,

dissenting.

I concur in the dissenting opinion of Mr. Chief Justice Hudgins. In addition to the reasons there advanced, I cannot agree with the views expressed in the majority opinion that the love and affection of this young mother for her six year old daughter will necessarily exceed that of the child’s paternal grandmother. Common experience frequently has shown the opposite to be true. The grandmother usually has fewer outside interests than a young woman and more often than not a grandchild confided to her care becomes the focus of her love and affection. ' I think the probabilities are that such will be true in this case. This young, pretty and attractive mother, living at Princeton with its thousands of University students seeking feminine companionship, can hardly be expected to refrain from an active social life. In the ordinary course of nature, she may be expected to aspire to another husband. I think it probable that activities of this land would greatly impair her ability or willingness to devote that constant attention and care to her daughter which the best interests of the child require.

Furthermore, a University town, with its throngs of young students, is not as suitable an environment for the upbringing of a young girl as the protected home which her grandparents are able and anxious to provide for her in Richmond.

I would affirm the decree of the chancellor.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.