Stanford v. Gray
Utah Supreme Court
Appeal from District Court, Third District) Hon. F. 0. Loofbourow, Judge. Action by Selma Stanford, attorney in fact for Belle Hansen, on behalf of Bobert Schroyier, against B. B. Gray and another. Judgment for plaintiff. Defendants appeal. STATEMENT OE FACTS. This is a habeas corpus proceeding involving the right to the control and custody of a child bom to respondent, Belle Hansen, out of lawful wedlock.
Read the full summary
Appeal from District Court, Third District) Hon. F. 0. Loofbourow, Judge. Action by Selma Stanford, attorney in fact for Belle Hansen, on behalf of Bobert Schroyier, against B. B. Gray and another. Judgment for plaintiff. Defendants appeal. STATEMENT OE FACTS. This is a habeas corpus proceeding involving the right to the control and custody of a child bom to respondent, Belle Hansen, out of lawful wedlock. The facts regarding the paternity of the child and the circumstances under which it ■was bom, as found by the trial court, are as follows: “That the said Belle Hansen is, and has been for…
1Opinion of the CourtMcGARTY, J.
(after stating the facts as above).
The first question presented by this appeal is: D'id the court err in deciding that the relinquishment executed by Belle Hansen September 12, 1910, which is set forth in the foregoing statement of facts, was not a bar to her right to recover the child?
Respondents contend:(1) That contracts by which a parent seeks to transfer and surrender the custody of his infant child to another •are void as against public policy; and (2) that, assuming, for the purposes of this ease, contracts of this kind, when fairly and voluntarily entered into, are binding between the…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Legate v. LegateTexas Supreme Court · 1894
- Campbell v. WrightCalifornia Supreme Court · 1900
- Lamar v. HarrisSupreme Court of Georgia · 1903
- Hohenadel v. SteeleIllinois Supreme Court · 1908
- Bonnett ex rel. Newmeyer v. BonnettSupreme Court of Iowa · 1883
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by23 opinions
- Walton v. Koffman Et Ux.Utah Supreme Court · 1946
- Grow v. Oregon Short Line Ry. Co.Utah Supreme Court · 1913
- Harrison v. HarkerUtah Supreme Court · 1914
- In Re Adoption of D____Utah Supreme Court · 1953
- Hummel v. ParrishUtah Supreme Court · 1913
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.