Search for: "IN THE INTEREST OF D. B., A CHILD"
Results 281 - 300
of 2,178
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
3 Aug 2017, 12:13 pm
In doing so, she only advanced, and acted as a spokesperson in black robes for, the sectarian interests of the Episcopal Forum to which she still (presumably -- the organization no longer publishes the names of its members) belongs. [read post]
9 Jul 2020, 8:15 am
“The court shall allocate parenting time according to the child’s best interests. [read post]
21 Feb 2023, 8:45 am
With very few family law cases receiving leave from our highest court, the Supreme Court of Canada continues to take an interest in relocation and child abduction cases with its latest pronouncement in F. v. [read post]
23 Sep 2013, 2:00 am
As relevant to this case, Tennessee Code Annotated § 36-6-108 provides: (d)(1) If the parents are not actually spending substantially equal intervals of time with the child [which the parties stipulated was the situation here] and the parent spending the greater amount of time with the child proposes to relocate with the child, the other parent may, within thirty (30) days of receipt of the notice, file a petition in opposition to removal of the… [read post]
31 Aug 2011, 7:42 am
(b).) [read post]
8 Sep 2011, 2:17 pm
Plus: alimony paid in this case d. [read post]
16 Sep 2011, 4:50 pm
Plus: alimony paid in this case d. [read post]
13 Oct 2011, 10:52 am
Plus: alimony paid in this case d. [read post]
8 Oct 2011, 2:09 pm
Plus: alimony paid in this case d. [read post]
5 Jan 2010, 5:30 am
Written by Craig D. [read post]
23 Aug 2013, 9:29 pm
Best Regards, Jon D. [read post]
3 Jun 2024, 3:28 pm
Pennell framed the class-gift problem as applied to posthumously conceived children in his write up of the Capato case: If D leaves DNA in the freezer and that DNA is used postmortem with the requisite permission to produce a child, it seems relatively clear that D intended that child to be a beneficiary of D’s estate. [read post]
10 Mar 2011, 12:26 pm
James D. [read post]
11 Apr 2009, 9:48 am
One such, Justice Harold B. [read post]
30 Jan 2017, 4:47 pm
B. [read post]
11 Jan 2020, 5:48 am
Family Court Act, §1055 (b)(E) was repealed. [read post]
3 Jan 2019, 1:59 pm
The case has since been transferred to the Southern District of Indiana alleging that Defendant, Dorel Juvenile Group, Inc. d/b/a Maxi-Cosi of Columbus, Indiana, infringed its rights in United States Patent No. 6,467,840 (“the ‘840 Patent”) for a “Child’s Car Seat Insert”. [read post]
30 Jul 2013, 9:01 am
Studer, Carissa D. [read post]
10 Mar 2014, 8:25 pm
Osceola Community Hospital d/b/a Bright Beginnings of Osceola County, Civil Action No. 5:12-cv-4087 (N.D. [read post]
27 Nov 2021, 6:26 am
Therefore, no hearing on the validity of process of service was necessary and the Family Court should not have dismissed the petition.Although the mother did not specifically seek an upward modification based on an increase in the father’s income by 15% or more, it was proper to modify the father’s child support obligation on this basis, as the parties declined to opt out of Family Court Act § 451(3)(b). [read post]
