Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Patterson v. Patterson

Supreme Court of Arizona

November 26, 1945

KATHALEEN IONA PATTERSON, Appellant,
v.
HARRY R. PATTERSON, Appellee

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of the County of Maricopa. Arthur T. LaPrade, Judge.

Judgment affirmed.

Messrs. Struckmeyer & Struckmeyer, for Appellant.

Mr. J. V. McCrory and Mr. Terrence A. Carson, for Appellee.

Russell, Superior Judge. Stanford, C. J., and Morgan, J., concur.Note: Justice LaPRADE having been disqualified, the Honorable H. L. RUSSELL, Judge of Superior Court of Coconino County, was called to sit in his stead.

OPINION

[63 Ariz. 500] Russell, Superior Judge.

Plaintiff, appellant here, brought suit for divorce against her husband, defendant-appellee. The complaint alleged cruelty of the defendant toward plaintiff. Defendant denied all the allegations of the complaint, and filed a cross complaint alleging cruelty against the plaintiff and praying for divorce and the custody of the minor children.

The matter was heard by the court, and a decree of divorce was granted to the defendant upon his cross complaint. He was awarded the community property, including personal property, bonds, and a small savings account. One horse, saddle and bridle were awarded to plaintiff. Custody of the children was awarded to the defendant, with reasonable visitorial privileges to the plaintiff, the children to be surrendered to the defendant forthwith. Defendant was required to pay plaintiff's attorneys' fees, and costs.

From this judgment, plaintiff appeals to this court.

There are two assignments of error submitted for our consideration:

"1. The court erred in entering judgment awarding the custody of the minor children to the appellee for the reason that the said judgment is contrary to the best interest of the children as shown by the record herein, and is an abuse of judicial discretion.

"2. The court erred in entering judgment that defendant take all of the community

Page 851

property except one designated item, for the reason that the court was without jurisdiction to strip the appellant of her entire interest in the community property, and the said ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.