PacLII Home | Databases | WorldLII | Search | Feedback

Reports of the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands

You are here:  PacLII >> Databases >> Reports of the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands >> 1983 >> [1983] TTLawRp 10

Database Search | Name Search | Recent Decisions | Noteup | LawCite | Download | Help

  Download original PDF


Eram v Threadgill [1983] TTLawRp 10; 8 TTR 345 (28 March 1983)

8 TTR 345

AWASIO ERAM, Appellant


v.


PRISCILLA THREADGILL, Appellee


Civil Appeal No. 294


Appellate Division of the High Court


Truk District


March 28, 1983


Appeal from trial court order awarding custody of child to the mother. The Appellate Division of the High Court, Miyamoto, Associate Justice, held that with respect to custody of an illegitimate child, although the best interest of the child is the ultimate concern, the natural mother has a prima facie right to custody, and evidence in the case showed that mother had cared for and supported the child previously, and was not an unfit mother, and therefore, order of the trial court was affirmed.

1. Domestic Relations-Divorce--Custody

With respect to custody of an illegitimate child as between two opposing parents, although the best interests of the child is the ultimate concern, the natural mother has a prima facie right to custody, and that light will not be defeated except upon a clear showing that she is not a fit person to be given custody.

2. Domestic Relations-Divorce--Custody

Trial court did not err, in child custody proceeding, by not considering Trukese customary law, where there was sufficient case law and statutory law on the subject to allow the court to render a decision.

3. Domestic Relations-Divorce--Custody

Trial court decision to award custody of child to mother was proper, where evidence showed that mother had cared for and supported the child for over one year prior to the child's removal from her custody, had nurtured the baby with extra care because of the child's allergy to certain foods, had travelled many thousands of miles to fight a valiant battle to regain custody, prospects of continued care, support and education of the child by the mother were good, and nothing in the evidence indicated that she was an unfit mother.
Counsel for Appellant:
JANET ECONOME, ESQ., JESUS C.

BORJA, ESQ., and CAROL ANN TELFORD, ESQ., Micronesian Legal Services Corporation
Counsel for Appellee:
None

Before MUNSON, Chief Justice, MIYAMOTO, Associate Justice, and LAURETA[1] Associate Justice

MIYAMOTO, Associate Justice


PacLII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback
URL: http://www.paclii.org/other/TTLawRp/1983/10.html