Search for: "State v. Family Child Care" Results 181 - 200 of 3,110
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
16 Apr 2023, 10:29 am by familoo
  The original decision was made by the President of the Family Division Sir Andrew MacFarlane (see Abbasi & Anor v Newcastle upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2021] EWHC 1699 (Fam), [2022] 1 FLR 348). [read post]
Non-Discrimination New Proposed FEHA Protected Classes: The Family Caregiver Anti-Discrimination Act, AB 524, would add family caregiver status — defined as “a person who is a contributor to the care of one or more family members”—“a spouse, child, parent, sibling, grandparent, grandchild, domestic partner, or any other individual related by blood or whose association with the employee is the equivalent of a… [read post]
(Pregnancy, according to the judge, is a “normal physiological state” and a “natural process essential to perpetuating human life. [read post]
10 Apr 2023, 3:30 am by Courtney Cahill
Courtney Cahill Dissenting in the 1972 decision Stanley v. [read post]
5 Apr 2023, 2:19 am by Matrix Law
The question whether the State is entitled to remove a child from home and family is not analogous to the question whether a prisoner who remains subject to a sentence can safely be released. [read post]
23 Mar 2023, 2:11 pm by Eugene Volokh
" Moreover, it long has been recognized that the failure of a parent to provide proper care for a child generally "is not a crime. [read post]
23 Mar 2023, 2:03 pm by mhpslaw
Navigating the complexities of parental relocation can be stressful for any family, especially when the custodial parent asks — can I move out of state with my child? [read post]
21 Mar 2023, 3:38 am by Jonathan H. Adler
The defendants were convicted and, relying upon its own precedent in United States v. [read post]
9 Mar 2023, 1:44 pm by Mark Ashton
This order made explicit reference to non-emergent medical care and religious upbringing. [read post]
8 Mar 2023, 4:05 am by Howard Friedman
Section 4 of SB 107 updates the California Family Code to read: “[t]he presence of a child in this state for the purpose of obtaining gender-affirming health care or gender-affirming mental health care…is sufficient to meet the requirements” for California courts to exercise jurisdiction over a custody decision. [read post]
5 Mar 2023, 9:01 pm by Neil Cahn
This articulation should reflect a careful consideration of the stated basis for its exercise of discretion, the parties’ circumstances, and its reasoning why there [should or] should not be a departure from the prescribed percentage. [read post]
4 Mar 2023, 4:38 am by SHG
It is extremely difficult to square the state bar’s version with what the prosecutor said, as recounted in Miller v Pate. [read post]