stating that ""`[t]he essence of custody is the companionship of the child and the right to make decisions regarding his care and control, education, health, and religion'"" (quoting Guardianship of Smith, 255 P.2d 761, 762 (Cal. 1953) (quoting Lerner v. Superior Court, 38 Cal.2d 676, 242 P.2d 321, 323 (1952)))
How later courts described this case
- stating that ""`[t]he essence of custody is the companionship of the child and the right to make decisions regarding his care and control, education, health, and religion'"" (quoting Guardianship of Smith, 255 P.2d 761, 762 (Cal. 1953) (quoting Lerner v. Superior Court, 38 Cal.2d 676, 242 P.2d 321, 323 (1952)))
- stating that “ ‘ “[t]he essence of custody is the companionship of the child and the right to make decisions regarding his care and control, education, health, and religion” ’ ” (quoting Guardianship of Smith, 255 P.2d 761, 762 (Cal. 1953) (quoting Lerner v. Superior Court, 242 P.2d 321, 323 (Cal. 1952)))
- holding that evidence of "a shabby and uncompelling nature" is insufficient to prove that a parent lacks the capacity to properly raise his or her child
- ' " ' The essence of custody is the companionship of the child and the right to make decisions regarding his [or her] care and control, education, health, and religion.' " ' (quoting In re Guardianship of Smith, 255 P.2d 761 , 762 (Cal. 1953), quoting in turn Lerner v. Superior Court of San Mateo County, 38 Cal. 2d 676, 681 , 242 P.2d 321, 323 (1952))
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
SIMPSON, Justice
(concurring specially)-
While still adhering to my dissent in the first case cited supra, I perforce must respectfully bow to the decision of the majority. With this preface I concur in the instant opinion that no sufficient change in conditions have been made to appear to justify modification of the former decree.