Search for: "IN THE INTEREST OF: A. C., A CHILD"
Results 2881 - 2900
of 4,774
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
3 Jul 2013, 9:42 am
(C) The rights of the author's children and grandchildren are in all cases divided among them and exercised on a per stirpes basis according to the number of such author's children represented; the share of the children of a dead child in a termination interest can be exercised only by the action of a majority of them. [read post]
3 Jul 2013, 3:31 am
(c) Economic Experts. [read post]
1 Jul 2013, 6:24 am
Local attorney, John C. [read post]
26 Jun 2013, 5:38 pm
Contact the Law Office of Scott C. [read post]
25 Jun 2013, 6:11 pm
[4]47 USC § 230(c)(2)(A) [read post]
25 Jun 2013, 2:49 pm
C. [read post]
25 Jun 2013, 1:05 pm
See, e.g., § 63.042(2)(c), Fla. [read post]
25 Jun 2013, 11:26 am
The only question considered in this instance was whether the grandparents had a legal cause of action (otherwise known as “standing”) to bring the case in the first place.Michigan’s Child Custody Act includes a section pertaining to grandparenting time which provides that [a] child’s grandparent may seek a grandparenting time order under 1 or more of the following circumstances:… (c) The child’s parent who is a… [read post]
25 Jun 2013, 7:24 am
We do not inquire whether leaving a child with his parents is “in the best interest of the child. [read post]
25 Jun 2013, 2:59 am
The Court also left open the question of whether the parents of a deceased child would have a separate claim in their individual capacities under c. 93A for loss of consortium, although it noted that it have never recognized loss of consortium damages as a distinct category of c. 93A damages. [read post]
25 Jun 2013, 2:59 am
The Court also left open the question of whether the parents of a deceased child would have a separate claim in their individual capacities under c. 93A for loss of consortium, although it noted that it have never recognized loss of consortium damages as a distinct category of c. 93A damages. [read post]
24 Jun 2013, 5:38 am
Patterson (Revocation of probation; "The defendant, William C. [read post]
22 Jun 2013, 8:30 am
MCQUEEN, Appellee. 5th District.Paternity -- Child support -- Trial court abused its discretion by failing to take into consideration economic effects of father's other two children and anticipated costs of travel associated with fact that father lives in New Jersey and child lives with primary custodial parent in Florida -- Child custody -- Parenting plan -- Inconsistencies and apparent typographical errors in parenting plan to be corrected on remandMICHAEL POPE,… [read post]
21 Jun 2013, 1:30 pm
Others say the Judge’s commentary is irrelevant because the case before him fell easily into the accepted law that where a couple live together and have a child, the non-custodial parent must pay child support, despite their unmarried status. [read post]
20 Jun 2013, 6:51 pm
He admitted to the police that he had sexual relations with the child, but stated that she told him that she was eighteen years old. [read post]
14 Jun 2013, 2:14 pm
The Wall Street Journal reported on page C-1 that a SEC administrative law judge had ruled against a former Maryland banker in finding him liable for “naked short selling. [read post]
14 Jun 2013, 6:00 am
C. [read post]
13 Jun 2013, 7:05 pm
Arkansas where (a) the prosecution advises a trial court that the appointment of a particular lawyer in a capital case to represent multiple defendants may create a conflict of interest; (b) the appointed lawyer informs the court that he is financially unable to appoint capitally certified counsel for each of the co-defendants; (c) the court acknowledges these conflicts of interest, but delegates resolution of them to the same lawyer; (d) the conflicted attorney then… [read post]
13 Jun 2013, 3:26 pm
To which -- it bears mention -- everyone substantially agrees.Spencer C. has an IEP in Maui, and his father (Doug C.) wants to be consulted about where Spencer gets placed in school. [read post]
13 Jun 2013, 2:00 am
Modifying the Parenting Schedule A party requesting only modification of the residential parenting schedule (but not a change of custody) must meet the standard set forth in Tennessee Code Annotated §36-6-101(a)(2)(C), which requires the petitioner to prove: a material change of circumstance affecting the child’s best interest. [read post]
