Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

161 W. Va. 45

239 S.E.2d 669

Cloud v. Cloud

West Virginia Supreme Court

Decided December 20, 1977

West Virginia Supreme Court · decided 1977-12-20

Key passage — most relied on by later courts

“To justify a change of child custody, in addition to a change in circumstances of the parties, it must be shown that such change would materially promote the welfare of the child.”

quoted by 11 later decisions, including 190 W. Va. 577 - Anderson v. Newman, Jenkins v. Jenkins

Relies on 133 W. Va. 501 - Pugh v. Pugh · 152 W. Va. 119 - Holstein v. Holstein · 158 W. Va. 964 - Funkhouser v. Funkhouser

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1977-12-20

How this case has been cited

Cited by 79 later decisions — most recently February 2014 · most notably 164 W. Va. 358 - Horton v. Horton (1980), 174 W. Va. 692 - Rowsey v. Rowsey (1985)

79 state decisions

32019771980199020002010decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Per Curiam:

¶1 In this appeal appellant, Mamie Selbe Cloud, seeks reversal of a Berkeley County Circuit Court order transferring custody of appellant’s three-year-old daughter, Kathleen, to the child’s father, Terry Martin Cloud.

¶2 This Court has firmly subscribed to two propositions with reference to the custody of very young children: (1) the law favors the mother if she is a fit person, other things being equal, Funkhouser v. Funkhouser, W.Va., 216 S.E.2d 570 (1975); Settle v. Settle, 117 W.Va. 476, 185 S.E. 859 (1936); and (2) where a change of custody is sought, a change in circumstances of the parties alone is *46 not enough. It must be shown that such change would materially promote the welfare of the child. Holstein v. Holstein, 152 W.Va. 119, 160 S.E.2d 177 (1968); Pugh v. Pugh, 133 W.Va. 501, 56 S.E.2d 901 (1949).

¶3 The evidence adduced in the instant case demonstrated that, except for appellant’s poverty, the parties were substantially equally ñt and in equal posture to provide for the welfare of the three-year-old Kathleen. There was no evidence showing that change of custody would materially promote the welfare of the child. By ignoring the foregoing two principles and transferring custody of the child to the father, the Circuit Court of Berkeley County erred.

¶4 We, therefore, reverse and remand this case to the Circuit Court of Berkeley County with instructions that custody of Kathleen be vested in the mother.

¶5 Reversed and remanded.

/161/wva/45 · .json · Public domain