Category

Blog
Hempel v. Hempel, 2011-CA-000763-MR Published:   Affirming in Part, Vacating in Part, and Remanding    County:  Oldham Ex-Husband appealed FC’s order, contending that FC erred by imputing income to him for child support purposes, by arbitrarily reducing his parenting time, and by making an unequal division of the marital estate.  Parenting Time:
Read More
J.M., Father v. A.D., Mother No. 2012-CA-000358-ME Published: Opinion Vacating and Remanding County: Jefferson J.M. (Father) appeals from Jefferson Family Court order granting A.D.’s (Mother) petition to alter or amend a previous order.
Read More
Wethington v. Coffey, standing to pursue child custody Stinson v. Stinson, contempt not available when respondent not served with DVO Digests to follow.  
Read More
Guenther v. Guenther, 2011-CA-001165-ME, (link to .pdf within minutes is broken) Issue:  Jurisdiction to enter DVO, error in entry of DVO Published:   Reversing and Remanding    County:  Kenton Ex-husband contested entry of DVO, contending FC was without jurisdiction to enter it, as DVO hearing was continued to more than 14 days after filing of EPO...
Read More
BLM, et al v. AM, et al. Court lacks authority to order sibling visitation following adoption. Digest to follow.
Read More
Take a look at Griffin v. Rice and the spirited dissents regarding whether an adulterous spouse can inherit from her husband's estate. 
Read More
Guenther v. Guenther, DVO, 2011 CA 001165. Link to case is missing from minutes, but will be included in case digest to follow.
Read More
S.S. v. Commonwealth, 2011-CA-001790-ME Published:   Affirming   County:  Jefferson Child, through GAL, appealed FC ruling that her Great-Grandmother had standing to intervene in suit as de facto custodian, arguing that she did not meet the requirements for de facto custodian status under KRS 403.270. FACTS:
Read More
Samson v. Samson, 2011-CA-002181-ME Published:   Affirming   County:  Fayette Father appeals order granting Mother leave to relocate with Child to Washington State, contending such an Order is not in Child’s best interests. FACTS:
Read More
1 45 46 47 48 49 173