Gray v. Gray
Mississippi Supreme Court
Appeal from the chancery court of Madison county. Hon. Lamar F. Easterling, Chancellor. Habeas Corpus proceeding by Frank Gray and wife against Dick Gray. From an order entered after decree awarding custody of child to petitioners which required petitioners to permit the child to visit defendant, petitioners appeal. The facts are fully stated in the opinion of the court.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the chancery court of Madison county. Hon. Lamar F. Easterling, Chancellor. Habeas Corpus proceeding by Frank Gray and wife against Dick Gray. From an order entered after decree awarding custody of child to petitioners which required petitioners to permit the child to visit defendant, petitioners appeal. The facts are fully stated in the opinion of the court. We think the chancellor exceeded his authority by entering in vacation, decrees materially changing his former decree, especially in view of the fact that no notice was given the parties, and no proof was offered, we are not…
1Opinion of the CourtSmith, C. J.
On the 29th day of November, 1918, Frank and Mary Gray, who are husband and wife, filed a petition with the Hon. Lamar Easterling, chancellor of the Fifth chancery district, alleging that their lawful child, James B. Gray, then about five years old, was unlawfully detained from them by Bichard Gray, the child’s grandfather, and praying for the issuance of a writ of habeas corpus, and that the custody of the child be awarded to them. The cause proceeded regularly to trial, resulting in an order reciting:
“That the said parents are fit and capable persons, willing and able to raise and maintain…
2Cited by11 opinions
- Bubac v. BostonMississippi Supreme Court · 1992
- Armstrong v. VancilOregon Supreme Court · 1942
- Mahaffey v. MahaffeyMississippi Supreme Court · 1936
- Henderson v. KleinmanIndiana Supreme Court · 1953
- Mitchell v. PowellMississippi Supreme Court · 1965
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.