In re Custody of Temos
Pennsylvania Superior Court
450 A.2d 111 (1982)

- Written by Caitlinn Raimo, JD
Facts
Glenn and Cathy Temos were the parents of seven-year-old Jessica and six-year-old Andrew. After Glenn and Cathy divorced, they entered into a separation agreement providing that Cathy would have custody of the children for 10 months per year and Glenn would have custody for two months each summer. Cathy owned a townhome in Allentown, Pennsylvania, and worked at a local hospital, while Glenn’s job transferred him to Utah. In the spring of 1981, Andrew went to live with Glenn in Utah, and Jessica joined them that summer. At the end of the summer, Jessica returned to Cathy’s home, but Glenn refused to return Andrew. Litigation ensued. As part of the litigation, a home study of Cathy’s home was conducted, and it was quite positive: it noted her well-kept and child-friendly neighborhood, clean home, effective parenting skills, and job stability, and mentioned that Jessica and Andrew appeared happy and well adjusted. The lower court nevertheless awarded custody of the children to Glenn. In its decision, the court did not refer to the home-study report—rather, it noted that Cathy, who was White, was in a romantic relationship with Wilburt Banks, who was Black and married to another woman. The court speculated that Cathy was involved in a financial transaction with the intention of helping Banks skirt the bankruptcy court. It also stated that Cathy had become increasingly career-oriented since her divorce from Glenn and had relied on babysitters. Cathy had regular work hours, her job was 10 minutes from her home, and she brought her children to school and ate dinner with them each night. Glenn worked similar hours. The trial court noted by contrast that Glenn was in a new “stable, loving marriage” with Darlene Temos, who did not work, and could provide a “normal, stable, and secure environment.” Cathy appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Spaeth, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.