Guardianship of Gianoli

California Court of Appeal Sep 16, 1943 No. Civ. 6959Published

Before: Adams

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court held that a minor over the age of fourteen has an absolute right to nominate their guardian, and the court must appoint such nominee if they are found to be a fit and proper person.

Issues

Whether the Superior Court of Sonoma County had jurisdiction over the guardianship proceedings.
Whether the minor's nomination of a guardian was sufficient to establish the necessity or convenience for the appointment.

Disposition. Affirmed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“She had arrived at the age of fourteen years and therefore had an absolute right to select and nominate her guardian or guardians, and her nominees having been found to be fit and proper persons, the court was required to appoint them.”

“parental relationship is of no consequence because the statute gives a minor over the age of fourteen years the authority to select her guardian.”

ADAMS, P. J.

Floyd Walker and Ida Walker, his wife, petitioned the Superior Court of Sonoma County' to be appointed the guardians of the person of Roberta Mabel Gianoli, a minor child over the age of fourteen years, their peti

[505]

tion being accompanied by a nomination of petitioners by the said minor.

Petitioners represented that the mother of said minor was dead, and that the child had been permitted by her father to make her home with petitioners at Clover dale for the past seven years; that during said time the child had gone from grammar school into high school, and had built her life around her present home and surroundings, which she desired not to have changed; that her father had now demanded custody of said child and intended to remove her to another county; that it was necessary and convenient that a guardian of said minor be appointed; that petitioner Ida Walker is the maternal aunt of said child, and that petitioners are fit and proper persons to have her care and custody.

The father of said child contested the granting of said petition, urging that the facts stated by petitioners did not show either necessity or convenience for the appointment of a guardian. He admitted that he had permitted said child to remain with petitioners for the purpose of attending school but alleged that he had paid for her maintenance. He further alleged that he had remarried and had a home for said child at Hopland, that he was capable of maintaining her, and that he and his wife both desired to have the child make her home with them.

At the trial of the proceeding it was stipulated that both petitioners and contestant are fit and proper persons to be appointed guardians of said child. Mrs. Walker testified that on the death of her sister, the mother of said child, Fred Gianoli had let petitioners take Roberta and her younger brother, and that both children had been living with them since that time; that their father had paid $10 per month each for their care, but was somewhat behind in his payments ; that Roberta was in her second year in high school, had formed associations with her schoolmates and was happy and contented; that she and her husband were able and willing to have the custody of Roberta and to maintain and support her; and that Roberta had signed the nomination freely and voluntarily without any request or suggestion on her part. Roberta testified that she desired to remain with her aunt and uncle, did not want to leave her present home and go to Hopland, that she had signed the nomination of petitioners as her guardians of her own free will, and that

Guardianship of Gianoli

AI Brief

ADAMS, P. J.

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

AI Brief