IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF
SALLY BRIGHT PETITIONER
V. MEMORANDUM
JOHN BRIGHT RESPONDENT
Comes Petitioner, by counsel, and for her Memorandum states as follows: I. FACTS Sally Bright (Petitioner), filed for divorce and custody of 14 year old daughter, Chastity. John Bright (Respondent) also requested custody. The court ordered temporary custody of the minor child to Petitioner and visitation with Respondent every weekend. Petitioner will be moving to another part of the country to take a job. Respondent has realized he is gay and has met a male companion who doesn’t reside with him presently, but someday might. Chastity testified that she feels weird around Respondent’s male companion. Psychologist, Dr.
…show more content…
The failure of a parent to comply with the provisions of this section may be considered as a factor if a change of custody is requested by the noncustodial parent. In Reel v. Harrison, 118 Nev. 881; 60 P.3d 480; 2002 Nev., “First Judicial District Court affirmed the trial court’s determination that § 125C.200 violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment by restricting a custodial parent's fundamental right to travel. The trial court also concluded that even if § 125C.200 was constitutional, the mother was still permitted to relocate the minor child to New Jersey, based on the career and educational opportunities available... and the ability to maintain reasonable visitation with the father”. In McGuinness v. McGuinness, 114 Nev. 1431, 970 P.2d 1074 (1998) the Nevada
Supreme Court first applied the relocation standards to a case involving joint physical custody.
The Court again emphasized the importance of alternate visitation arrangements, reasoning that physical separation does not necessarily preclude a parent from maintaining significant and substantial involvement in a child’s life, and noting alternate methods of maintaining a meaningful relationship, including telephone calls, e-mail messages, letters, and frequent visitation. Id. at 1436. The Court went on to reverse
Child relocation laws and best practices in the United States vary from state to state. Child custody in Arizona is defined as “legal decision-making” for the child and visitation is known as “parenting time”. The term “child custody” is no longer used, effective January 1, 2013. The court can order one or both parties to have legal decision-making authority for the child(ren) and consider many factors, falling under A.R.S. 25-403. In the case of joint legal decision-making authority, both parents must work together to make decisions regarding the child. If one parent is granted sole legal decision-making authority, they make decisions about the child without consenting the other parent as long as it
Mr. Potbelly holds a garage sale at his home. Mr. Slim Jim stops by the sale and upon noticing a rare piece of art pottery offers a price of $100 for the art that is marked $250. Mr. Potbelly accepts Mr. Slim Jim’s offer. Mr. Potbelly informs Mr. Slim Jim he is selling his home because he is moving up north because he has lost his job. Mr. Slim Jim asks how much he is selling it for and Mr. Potbelly informs him he is thinking $75,000. Mr. Slim Jim offers him $70,000 cash for the property which Mr. Potbelly immediately accepts the offer. Mr. Slim Jim informs Mr. Potbelly that he will be back in one hour with a cashiers’ check made payable to Mr. Potbelly. Mr. Potbelly says “Great!” and that while Mr. Slim Jim
This letter is to inform you, that your tax appeal hearing has been scheduled for March 6, 2005, at 10:30 a.m. The hearing will be held at the County Office building located at 211 Race Road. The court room is located on the 5th floor.
According to many the custody of a child should be determined with the best interest of the child in mind. However, it is not easy for a
Child custody have been an issue for many years but no clear rules have been established until approximately in the 1970’s. In the early colonial years, the arrangement was unappealing to children and their mothers and possibly doing psychologically damage. Luckily, history has evolved and children’s well-being has become a priority in divorce cases.
This letter is to advise you that your tax appeal hearing is coming up on March 6, 2005 at 10:35 a.m. at the Office of the Tax Assessors of Lackawanna County. The office is located on the 5th floor of the County Office Building; 211 Ace Road, Clark, Pennsylvania 18111. Attorney Smith would like to remind you to arrive at the County Office Building at 10:25 a.m. with all of the pictures you have of the comparable houses in your area.
The Court reasoned that the Washington statute violated parents’ rights under the Fourteenth Amendment’s Due Process Clause because it stripped them of the autonomy to make best care decisions for their young.
The studies conducted used a wide array of individuals, brother-sister, brother-brother and twins. Throughout the article, majority of the focus caters to homosexual men in relation and comparison to
Again, Section 24 authorizes the court to determine immediate “removal of a child from his home for the only reason to protect the child from serious abuse or neglect.” See Care & Protection of Robert. According to G.L. c. 119, Section 1, the court must “take into account the presumption that a child’s best interests generally are best served if the child is able to remain with her natural
This story is replete with fascinating facts and the intricacies that are inherent in the facts of the case make for a great story.The baseball bat was broken from the outset when it was bought by the plaintiff. Therefore, the defendant should have to return the baseball bat and pay the money back to the plaintiff that plaintiff paid for said bat. The plaintiff bought a baseball bat from the defendant and the baseball bat turned out to be broken because, since as soon as the defendant used the bat to play baseball, the bat shattered into a million pieces. Shattering into a million pieces certainly violates the implied warranty of merchantability under the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC 2-314). No Industria De Calcados Martini Ltda. v.
Specifically, with the idea of ‘best interest of the child’ being looked at for in the legal system. The judge on a divorce case with a custody dispute may have used this policy to justify their ruling of who would be given physical custody of the child. An example of this would be when the sexual conduct of the parents was brought up and how it would affect the children. Some judges seemed to feel either that this sexual experience had no ill effects or that it had a negative effect on the children. Also, any hopes that the Nebraska Legislature had with trying to make the process through the legal system painless and unhostile were made null when using the no fault system. This was because many child custody cases usually caused tension between both parties regarding ‘ownership’ over the child. This could sometimes be seen in that the children became pawns in the desire of the parents to have power and control over the situation or the
Procedural History: Plaintiff filed for divorce on January 2013 and sue for custody or visitation right to the child in Supreme Court, Suffolk County. The Supreme Court determined without a hearing that the plaintiff lack standing because she was not the biological or adoptive parent of the child and gave sole custody to the defendant. The Plaintiff appealed to the Appellate Division.
1. The issue is whether public school officials have the authority to perform strip searches of students in suspicion of hiding illegal drugs.
The 14th Amendment states: All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
For the most part, parents have the best interest of their children at heart. However, there are unfortunately many cases throughout the United States where parents are unable to, for one reason or another, take care of their children. Sometimes, this can be seen as a health issue of the parents. Sometimes, parents are unable to raise their children well due to physical, financial, and/or emotional issues. Other times, parents do not have the best interests of their children in mind and can be neglectful or abusive to them. In these circumstances, the state may become involved and step into