This case raises issues pertaining to the parental right to control the education and religious training of minor children. We hold that here the chancery court, an agency of the State, acted beyond its powers in directing and restricting the father in his right to control their intellectual and religious education, where he was a fit person for their custody.
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Let's get started
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
