The high court voted unanimously Monday to give Nalini Patel custody of her two youngest children, ages 11 and 13. The court, which included two acting justices, said her 17-year-old son could remain with his father, Anand Patel, in California.

The justices also said Nalini Patel was entitled to $1,500 a month in alimony and $91,500 in back alimony. The court said she should get $1,150 a month in child support. "I'm excited because the Patel saga, after 10 years, is finally over," Nalini Patel said Monday.

Anand Patel has had the children since 1997, when Family Court Judge Haskell Abbott of Conway granted him custody. Abbott almost lost his re-election bid in 2002 when lawmakers questioned his decision in the case.

After a trial in January 2003, Family Court Judge James Spruill awarded Nalini Patel custody of her younger two children.

Anand Patel is suing Spruill and Republican state Sens. Hugh Leatherman of Florence, Larry Martin of Pickens and Bill Mescher of Pinopolis, who wrote letters on Nalini Patel's behalf to Spruill. The suit alleges the senators improperly influenced Spruill. Anand Patel claimed Monday that senators had contacted Chief Justice Jean Toal, and that influenced the high court's ruling. Toal didn't participate in Monday's ruling.

The Patels' dispute led to a state Supreme Court ruling in 2001 that established guidelines for court-appointed guardians representing children in private custody cases.

After a trial in January 2003, Family Court Judge James Spruill awarded Nalini Patel custody of her younger two children.

Anand Patel is suing Spruill and Republican state Sens. Hugh Leatherman of Florence, Larry Martin of Pickens and Bill Mescher of Pinopolis, who wrote letters on Nalini Patel's behalf to Spruill. The suit alleges the senators improperly influenced Spruill.

Anand Patel claimed Monday that senators had contacted Chief Justice Jean Toal, and that influenced the high court's ruling. Toal didn't participate in Monday's ruling.

"This ruling that we got today was not the opinion of the Supreme Court," Anand Patel said Monday.

The Patels' divorce and custody dispute led to a state Supreme Court ruling in 2001 that established guidelines for court-appointed guardians representing children in private custody cases. In that ruling, the justices unanimously said the first guardian in the Patel case, who was not a lawyer, didn't do a fair investigation.

Click here to return to story:
http://www.charleston.net/stories/052604/sta_26custody.shtml