Search for: "In re Marriage of Burgess (1996)"
Results 1 - 4
of 4
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
21 Apr 2011, 7:30 am
Second, the court improperly placed an implied burden on Father when it stated in its order that the reason for his move was to "join a new wife," something that was not "sufficiently necessary;" this is contrary to the California Supreme Court ruling in In re Marriage of Burgess (1996) 13 Cal.4th 25 that a moving custodial parent is not required to show necessity. [read post]
24 Sep 2010, 9:07 am
" (In re Marriage of Burgess (1996) 13 Cal.4th 25, 32 (Burgess).) [read post]
16 Jun 2009, 9:04 am
The court, citing In re Marriage of Burgess (1996) 13 Cal.4th 25 (Burgess), determined that Father had failed to show changed circumstances. [read post]
10 Apr 2007, 5:57 am
The court of appeal relied on an earlier California Supreme Court decision, In re Marriage of Burgess, 13 Cal. 4th 25, 913 P.2d 473, 51 Cal. [read post]
