Thanks for visiting! Welcome to a new way to research case law. You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation and good law / bad law checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.
DeGrange v. Kline
Citations: 254 A.2d 353; 254 Md. 240; 1969 Md. LEXIS 866Docket: [No. 306, September Term, 1968.]
Court: Court of Appeals of Maryland; June 24, 1969; Maryland; State Supreme Court
Calvin E. DeGrange appealed a Circuit Court decision that awarded custody of his son, Charles Edward DeGrange, Jr., to K.S. and June Kline, his sister and brother-in-law, instead of to him. DeGrange, married to Barbara DeGrange since 1959, has two other children from previous marriages, both residing with their mothers. In 1964, Barbara took their son to Florida, and after a brief stay with the Klines, returned to New Jersey. Following a separation in 1966, DeGrange failed to pay child support, claiming his wife had disappeared. He did not see his son from August 1966 to July 1967, when he learned the boy was living with the Klines. After the Klines refused to return the child, DeGrange sought custody. The appeal centered on whether the court erred in granting custody to the Klines. Evidence presented included DeGrange's dishonorable discharge from the Air Force and his demanding work schedule. His estranged wife testified against his suitability for custody, citing issues with alcohol consumption and work habits. Testimony indicated the child was in poor health when he moved in with the Klines, who provided proper medical care and improved his condition. The Klines, childless and eager to raise Charles, planned to relocate and adjust their employment for his benefit. The case reflects a shift from common law presumption favoring fathers' custody rights, emphasizing the child's welfare in custody determinations. In Maryland, both parents are joint custodians of their minor children, equally responsible for their support, education, and welfare. A presumption exists favoring parental custody unless opposing parties can demonstrate otherwise, as affirmed in Trenton v. Christ. However, the child's best interests remain the primary focus, which may override this presumption, even leading to the denial of custody to a parent (Dietrich v. Anderson). In the examined case, the lower court's decision to maintain custody with the child's aunt and uncle was upheld, given the father's lack of compelling evidence demonstrating his fitness as a caregiver, coupled with his long work hours that would leave the child in the care of others. The mother showed minimal interest in the child. The court concluded that the child's welfare was best served by remaining with the appellees, affirming the order and assigning costs to the appellant.