Search for: "State v. Childs"
Results 41 - 60
of 20,812
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
1 Jul 2007, 11:35 pm
In Tennessee Department of Human Services v. [read post]
20 Jan 2017, 12:17 pm
In Ramirez-Barker v. [read post]
20 Jan 2017, 12:17 pm
In Ramirez-Barker v. [read post]
8 Feb 2012, 2:51 pm
See Hamblen v. [read post]
15 Jun 2018, 6:00 am
Taylor v. [read post]
2 Dec 2023, 8:02 am
Read the opinion The post RYAN WILLIAM KAISER v. [read post]
2 Dec 2023, 7:54 am
STATE OF MARYLAND appeared first on Maryland Daily Record. [read post]
19 May 2008, 3:11 am
Congress passed the 2003 "PROTECT Act" to try to shore up federal controls on child pornography after the Supreme Court struck down a 1996 federal law on the subject in Ashcroft v. [read post]
20 Oct 2011, 6:32 am
In Brough v Law [2011] EWCA Civ 1183, decided today, the Court of Appeal considered the effect of the parents' reconciliation upon a child maintenance assessment, with reference to the provisions of the Child Support Act 1991 as operative in 1999.The Facts: The parents were married, and had a son, born in 1996. [read post]
30 May 2015, 1:29 pm
When it comes to child support calculations in Indiana, state courts are given guidelines by which to adhere. [read post]
18 Apr 2022, 4:48 am
State of Ohio v. [read post]
2 Oct 2015, 9:11 am
., the family courts in this state operate with the strong presumption that a child’s interests are best served by being placed with his or her natural parent. [read post]
1 Jun 2015, 8:28 pm
State v. [read post]
27 May 2013, 2:00 am
Waldo v. [read post]
28 Jan 2009, 4:01 am
Carlos Rivas v. [read post]
15 Jul 2016, 8:29 am
Andrick – Indiana Child Custody Modification Order Affirmed in Part, Remanded in Part, May 20, 2016, Hammond Child Custody Lawyer Blog The post Martinez v. [read post]
15 Jul 2016, 8:29 am
Andrick – Indiana Child Custody Modification Order Affirmed in Part, Remanded in Part, May 20, 2016, Hammond Child Custody Lawyer Blog The post Martinez v. [read post]
19 Feb 2012, 10:29 pm
Z (A child) [2012] EWHC 139 (Fam) is, to my knowledge, the first reported relocation case since MK v CK [2011] EWCA Civ 793.To briefly recap, in MK v CK it was made clear that the only principle to be drawn from Payne v Payne [2001] 1 FLR 1052 - which had skewed relocation decisions for ten years - was the paramountcy principle - everything else was guidance.Returning to Z (A child) :The facts: This case comes with a lot of 'baggage', primarily… [read post]
23 Dec 2016, 6:00 am
Baker v. [read post]
27 Jul 2022, 6:28 am
Read the opinion The post MIA JULIANA MARTINEZ v. [read post]
