California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from Stauffacher v. Stauffacher, 227 Cal.App.2d 735, 39 Cal.Rptr. 31 (Cal. App. 1964):
2 In making our decision we are not unmindful of the fact that accompanying the judgment roll there was filed in this court the judge's memorandum of opinion and the 'Probation Officer's Custody Investigation Report.' The latter was before the court prior to the making of the decree appealed from. These, of course, are no part of the judgment roll. We, however, note that the probation officer recommended that the custody of the children be awarded to plaintiff. The judge's opinion, while it refers to certain objectionable conduct of plaintiff in the past, and of certain conduct of defendant in the present, does not discuss whether such conduct has in any way affected the care of the children nor whether the parents are unfit. As said in Wilkinson v. Wilkinson, supra, 105 Cal.App.2d at page 398, 233 P.2d p. 643, concerning the mother there, 'It is her present fitness and not her past conduct which should be determinative of present rights.' (See also Prouty v. Prouty, (1940) 16 Cal.2d 190, 194, 105 P.2d 295.)
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.