Holmes v. Sanders, 243 N.C. 171 (1955)

Nov. 23, 1955 · Supreme Court of North Carolina
243 N.C. 171
SEABORNE HOLMES v. BANNIE SANDERS and MARTHA SANDERS

SEABORNE HOLMES v. BANNIE SANDERS and MARTHA SANDERS.

(Filed 23 November, 1955.)

Infants § 22—

In a special proceeding by the father to obtain custody of his child as against the child’s maternal grandparents, judgment of the court awarding the custody of the child to its grandparents upon findings, supported by evidence, that it is to the best interests of the child that its custody remain with its grandparents, will not be disturbed.

Appeal by plaintiff from Williams, J., Resident of Fourth Judicial District, at Chambers in Sanford, N. C.

Special proceeding instituted by petitioner, Seaborne Holmes, citizen of the State of Georgia, and resident of District of Columbia, pursuant to provisions of G.S. 50-13 for the custody of his minor child, Ransome Solomon Holmes, born 1 September, 1953, to petitioner and his wife, Fidelia Sanders Holmes, now deceased, residing with respondents, Bannie Sanders and Martha Sanders, his maternal grandparents, in their home in Johnston County, North Carolina, heard upon affidavits, and oral argument of counsel, for the respective parties. Upon facts found by the Judge, among others pertinent to inquiry, that it is to the best interest of the child, Ransome Solomon Holmes, that he remain in the custody of his grandparents, the respondents, naming them, it is ordered by the court that they “shall have and continue to have the custody of the” child “until further orders of this court ...”

Petitioner excepted thereto, and appeals therefrom to Supreme Court, and assigns error.

Canaday & Canaday for plaintiff, appellant.

Wellons & Wellons for defendants, appellees.

Pee CuRIAm.

Upon the facts found by the court, supported by sufficient competent evidence, the judgment from which appeal is taken is accordant with the well settled principle in North Carolina that in matters pertaining to their custody, the welfare of children is “the polar star by which the discretion of the courts is to be guided,” In re Lewis, 88 N.C. 31; Finley v. Sapp, 238 N.C. 114, 76 S.E. 350, and cases cited. *172See also Atkinson v. Downing, 175 N.C. 244, 95 S.E. 487, where custody of a child awarded to a grandparent was not disturbed on appeal.

Affirmed.