# Drewry v. Drewry

> Court of Appeals of Arkansas · October 21, 1981 · 3 Ark. App. 97

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9684569

## Case

- **Full name:** Linda DREWRY v. Benny DREWRY
- **Court:** Court of Appeals of Arkansas
- **Decided:** October 21, 1981
- **Citations:** 3 Ark. App. 97; 622 S.W.2d 206; 1981 Ark. App. LEXIS 775
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Cracraft
- **Judges:** Glaze, Mayfield, Cracraft, Cooper
- **Cited by:** 12 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9684569

## Opinion text

George K. Cracraft, Judge, concurring. Although I cannot agree with all of the reasons for affirmance set forth in the majority opinion and find my own views more akin to those expressed by Judge Cooper in his dissenting opinion, I am compelled to concur in the result announced in the majority opinion.
While I find it difficult to visualize what factors the chancellor may have considered in determining that this transitory custodial arrangement would advance the child’s best interest, I must concede that he was in a far superior position than we to properly assess those factors. He saw and heard the witnesses and had access to an impartial report prepared by the Department of Social Services. We have before us only a cold and expressionless written record. There is no type of case in which the personal observations made by the chancellor mean more or are entitled to more weight than in those involving the custody of a small child. Wilson v. Wilson, 228 Ark. 789 , 310 S.W. 2d 500 (1958).
I am of the opinion that the proper rule to apply in such cases is that stated in Aaron v. Aaron, 228 Ark. 27 , 305 S.W. 2d 550 (1957), that divided custody of a minor child is not favored by the law of either man or nature and should never be ordered unless clearly warranted by the evidence. However, in view of the superior position of the chancellor in such matters, I am unwilling to say that his finding in this case was clearly unwarranted by the evidence and erroneous.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9684569. Public record. Not legal advice.