Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Herdman v. Schiffman

California Supreme Court

Decided December 22, 1980No. S.F. No. 24167Published

1ConcurrenceMosk, J.

I concur in the order, but would qualify the rationale.

Nearly three decades ago we declared unanimously that the “essence of custody is the companionship of the child and the right to make decisions regarding his care and control, education, health, and religion” (Lerner v. Superior Court (1952) 38 Cal.2d 676, 681 [242 P.2d 321]; also see Roche v. Roche (1944) 25 Cal.2d 141, 144 [152 P.2d 999]). That principle has been respected throughout the years, most recently in In re Marriage of O’Connell (1978) 80 Cal.App.3d 849, 858 [146 Cal.Rptr. 26].

We might indulge in a fruitless debate as to…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. In Re Marriage of CarneyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1979
  2. Lerner v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1952
  3. Roche v. RocheCalifornia Supreme Court · 1944
  4. In Re Marriage of O'ConnellCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1978
  5. Donald J. v. Evna M.California Court of Appeal · 1978

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API