Sentences with phrase «custody of children under»

''... as amended, prohibits discrimination in the sale, rental, and financing of dwellings, and in other housing - related transactions, based on race, color, national origin, religion, sex, familial status (including children under the age of 18 living with parents or legal custodians, pregnant women, and people securing custody of children under the age of 18), and disability.»

Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1968 (Fair Housing Act), as amended, prohibits discrimination in the sale, rental, and financing of dwellings, and in other housing - related transactions, based on race, color, national origin, religion, sex, familial status (including children under the age of 18 living with parents of legal custodians, pregnant women, and people securing custody of children under the age of 18), and handicap (disability).

To that end, we fully support the principles of the Fair Housing Act (Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1968), as amended, which prohibits discrimination in the sale, rental, and financing of dwellings, and in other housing - related transactions, based on race, color, national origin, religion, sex, familial status (including children under the age of 18 living with parents of legal custodians, pregnant women, and people securing custody of children under the age of 18), and handicap (disability).

and its parent company, Realogy Corporation fully support the principles of the Fair Housing Act (Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1968), as amended, which generally prohibits discrimination in the sale, rental, and financing of dwellings, and in other housing - related transactions, based on race, color, national origin, religion, sex, familial status (including children under the age of 18 living with parents of legal custodians, pregnant women, and people securing custody of children under the age of 18), and handicap (disability).

The Fair Housing Act (FHAct) protects all residents from discrimination on the basis of race, color, national origin, religion, sex, handicap or familial status (families with children under the age of 18 living with parents or legal guardians; pregnant women and people trying to get custody of children under 18).

Summary: Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1968 (Fair Housing Act), as amended, prohibits discrimination in the sale, rental, and financing of dwellings, and in other housing - related transactions, based on race, color, national origin, religion, sex, familial status (including children under the age of 18 living with parents or legal custodians, pregnant women, and people securing custody of children under the age of 18), and handicap (disability).

Some people share custody of their children under a court order that addresses the issue of out - of - state travel.

One of the most important determinations made when two people seek a legal separation or divorce regards custody of any children under the age of eighteen.

(a) If an individual who has been awarded custody of a child under this chapter intends to move to a residence: (1) other than a residence specified in the custody order; and

Not exact matches

Under the law, within 72 hours of their capture, children from Central America must be transferred from immigration detention to the custody of the Department of Health & Human Services.

He also argues that parents exercise certain «sole and inviolable» lawmaking powers over their children in the areas of custody, care, upbringing, discipline, and education, which the Supreme Court has acknowledged in many cases under the due - process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

One thing makes me feel very uncomfortable when I see parent fools their children by lying to them that an old dude with the name of Santa will come and get you gifts or anything you wish for... and they put things under the tree and make these poor children know that these are from Santa... and its being done generation after generation... parents now were victimized when they were child by their parents and they are repeating the same with their children and it is now in a loop and no one seems to be wanting to get out of the loop which is plain lie and very clear... but these poor children has nothing to do as they under the custody of these parents...

Obtaining a passport for a child under the age of 16 can be tricky for single parents who share joint legal custody.

They fall under the umbrella of what's called the «best interests of the child» doctrine, a list of factors a judge must consider when awarding custody.

However, joint custody is not presumed to be in the best interests of the child (ren) under statute in Maryland, although the judge will likely consider joint custody in most every case.

Under District of Columbia law, custody of any child (ren) of the marriage may be granted jointly or to either parent by court decision (order).

Under Maryland law, custody of any child (ren) of the marriage may be granted jointly or to either parent by court decision (order).

Courts in many states have shared this reluctance to divide custody, declaring that divided custody is to be avoided as not in the best interests of the children and that it will be sanctioned only under exceptional circumstances.

Under South Dakota law, a parent who has been convicted of domestic violence, child abuse or assault is not fit to have custody.

Breech Twins and higher order multiples Previous CS Pre-Eclampsia Placenta praevia Cervical incompetence Previous late stillbirth Previous premature birth Grand multiparty Age under 18 Age over 35 Smoking Drug use Severe mental health issue Epilepsy Type 1 diabetes Type 2 diabetes Gestational diabetes Asthma GBS positive Abnormal antibodies Transplant recipient Congenital heart disease Known foetal abnormality Immunosuppressive medication MS Physical disability Intellectual disability Hypothyroidism Hyperthyroidism Previous shoulder dystocia Previous 3rd or 4th degree tear Sickle Cell anaemia BMI under 18 or over 35 at conception Previous massive PPH APH in current pregnancy HIV / AIDS Hepatitis B or C Active TB IUGR Oligohydramnios Polyhydramnios Child previously removed from custody because of abuse Uterine abnormalities such as uterine septum or double uterus Previous uterine surgery for fibroids Chronic renal problems Hypertension Auto immune condition Previous stroke or blod clot Cancer Domestic violence or abusive home Prisoners Homeless women

(borrowed from Dr Kitty) Breech Twins and higher order multiples Previous CS Pre-Eclampsia Placenta praevia Cervical incompetence Previous late stillbirth Previous premature birth Grand multiparty Age under 18 Age over 35 Smoking Drug use Severe mental health issue Epilepsy Type 1 diabetes Type 2 diabetes Gestational diabetes Asthma GBS positive Abnormal antibodies Transplant recipient Congenital heart disease Known foetal abnormality Immunosuppressive medication MS Physical disability Intellectual disability Hypothyroidism Hyperthyroidism Previous shoulder dystocia Previous 3rd or 4th degree tear Sickle Cell anaemia BMI under 18 or over 35 at conception Previous massive PPH APH in current pregnancy HIV / AIDS Hepatitis B or C Active TB IUGR Oligohydramnios Polyhydramnios Child previously removed from custody because of abuse Uterine abnormalities such as uterine septum or double uterus Previous uterine surgery for fibroids Chronic renal problems Hypertension Auto immune condition Previous stroke or blod clot Cancer Domestic violence or abusive home Prisoners Homeless women

In Iowa, if a couple (married or unmarried) has children in the family under the age of eighteen, the courts will play a role in making decisions related to child custody.

Under Alabama law, a court may consider an award of joint custody, whereby the parental rights of both parties remain intact, with one parent as the primary custodian of the children and the other as the secondary custodian.

In the latter a father is shot after refusing to surrender custody of his child and others are seen being herded under gunfire.

As used in this paragraph, a «Covered Borrower» means any person who, at the time such person becomes obligated on a loan transaction or establishes an account for consumer credit, satisfies the requirements under any one or more of the following classifications, or is otherwise under applicable laws deemed to be a «Covered Borrower» under the Military Lending Act, 10 U.S. Code Section 987: (a) An active duty member of the Army, Navy, Marine Corps, Air Force or Coast Guard, or a person serving on active Guard and Reserve duty (a person described in this clause (a) of the definition of «Covered Borrower» is hereinafter referred to as a «Service Member»); or (b) Any of the following persons, relative to a Service Member: (1) The spouse; (2) A child under the age of 21; or (3) If dependent on the Service Member for more than one half of such person's support, any one or more of the following persons: (i) A child under the age of 23 enrolled in a full time course of study at an institution of higher learning; (ii) A child of any age incapable of self support due to a mental or physical incapacity that occurred before attaining age 23 while such person was dependent on the Service Member; (iii) Any unmarried person placed in legal custody of the Service Member who resides with such Service Member unless separated by military service or to receive institutional care or under other circumstances covered by Regulation; or (iv) A parent or parent - in - law residing in the Service Member's household.

An essential element of any case under the Convention is that, «pursuant to the laws or regulations of the state of habitual residence, said removal or retention breaches the rights of custody with respect to the child attributed to the petitioner.»

Posted Thursday, June 21st, 2012 by Gregory Forman Filed under Child Custody, Legislation, Of Interest to Family Court Litigants, Of Interest to Family Law Attorneys, South Carolina Specific 7 Comments»

Posted Monday, October 4th, 2010 by Gregory Forman Filed under Child Custody, Guardians Ad Litem, Not South Carolina Specific, Of Interest to Family Court Litigants, Of Interest to Family Law Attorneys

Posted Sunday, September 20th, 2009 by Gregory Forman Filed under Child Custody, Jurisprudence, Law and Culture, Of Interest to Family Court Litigants, Of Interest to Family Law Attorneys, Of Interest to General Public, South Carolina Specific

Posted Tuesday, June 15th, 2010 by Gregory Forman Filed under Child Custody, Contempt / Enforcement of Orders, Family Court Procedure, Jurisprudence, Litigation Strategy, Of Interest to Family Law Attorneys, South Carolina Specific, Visitatiof Orders, Family Court Procedure, Jurisprudence, Litigation Strategy, Of Interest to Family Law Attorneys, South Carolina Specific, VisitatiOf Interest to Family Law Attorneys, South Carolina Specific, Visitation

Posted Wednesday, June 20th, 2012 by Gregory Forman Filed under Child Custody, Of Interest to Family Court Litigants, Of Interest to Family Law Attorneys, Of Interest to General Public, South Carolina Appellate Decisions, South Carolina Specific

Posted Sunday, April 24th, 2016 by Gregory Forman Filed under Child Custody, Jurisprudence, Law and Culture, Not South Carolina Specific, Of Interest to Family Court Litigants, Of Interest to Family Law Attorneys, Of Interest to General Public

Posted Wednesday, February 10th, 2010 by Gregory Forman Filed under Child Custody, Continuing Legal Education, Litigation Strategy, Of Interest to Family Law Attorneys, South Carolina Specific No Comments»

Posted Thursday, January 30th, 2014 by Gregory Forman Filed under Child Custody, Family Court Procedure, Jurisprudence, Of Interest to Family Court Litigants, Of Interest to Family Law Attorneys, South Carolina Specific 4 Comments»

Finally, under the new act, the government is authorized to locate a child and enforce the custody determination, and the prosecutor is authorized to utilize any civil proceeding to secure the enforcement of the custody determination.

Posted Sunday, January 2nd, 2011 by Gregory Forman Filed under Child Custody, Jurisdiction, Not South Carolina Specific, Of Interest to Family Court Litigants, Of Interest to Family Law Attorneys 10 Comments»

Under California Family Code § 3080, there is a presumption that joint custody (physical and legal — California Family Code § 3002) is in the best interest of the child.

However, under the UCCJEA, a parent is entitled to defend or bring a child custody proceeding in the other parent's state of residence without opening him or herself up to defending child support there too.

Posted Sunday, November 23rd, 2014 by Gregory Forman Filed under Child Custody, Jurisdiction, Litigation Strategy, Not South Carolina Specific, Of Interest to Family Court Litigants, Of Interest to Family Law Attorneys

Posted Sunday, November 23rd, 2014 by Gregory Forman Filed under Child Custody, Jurisdiction, Litigation Strategy, Not South Carolina Specific, Of Interest to Family Court Litigants, Of Interest to Family Law Attorneys 3 Comments»

The so - called «shared custody» grants parents an equal role in the upbringing of their children, even if they don't all live under the same roof, the child will be resident at the house of one of the two parents.

The first, Tribal Law, Indian Child Welfare Act, and Custody, looks at the highly publicized California case in which a 6 - year - old girl named Lexi was removed from her foster home under the Indian Child Welfare Act of 1978 and sent to live with relatives in Utah.

Posted Friday, July 27th, 2012 by Gregory Forman Filed under Adoption / Termination of Parental Rights, Child Custody, Not South Carolina Specific, Of Interest to Family Law Attorneys, Of Interest to General Public, South Carolina Appellate Decisioof Parental Rights, Child Custody, Not South Carolina Specific, Of Interest to Family Law Attorneys, Of Interest to General Public, South Carolina Appellate DecisioOf Interest to Family Law Attorneys, Of Interest to General Public, South Carolina Appellate DecisioOf Interest to General Public, South Carolina Appellate Decisions

There are two issues to be addressed under the umbrella of Child Custody — Legal Custody and Physical Custody.

Posted Tuesday, May 5th, 2009 by Gregory Forman Filed under Child Custody, Jurisprudence, Of Interest to Family Law Attorneys, South Carolina Appellate Decisions, South Carolina Specific

Posted Saturday, July 4th, 2015 by Gregory Forman Filed under Child Custody, Of Interest to Family Court Litigants, Of Interest to Family Law Attorneys, South Carolina Specific

Thus, the Convention requires the left - behind parent to establish that the child was taken from the «habitual residence» and that the parent had «rights of custody» under the law of that jurisdiction.

In a nutshell, a Hague Convention application may be made when a child is taken or retained across an international border, away from his or her habitual residence, without the consent of a parent who has rights of custody under the law of the habitual residence, if the two countries are parties to the Convention.

Under this section of the act, the court can prohibit a party from changing a child's name as an incident of custody.

Posted Tuesday, August 12th, 2014 by Gregory Forman Filed under Child Custody, Jurisprudence, Not South Carolina Specific, Of Interest to Family Court Litigants, Of Interest to Family Law Attorneys 8 Comments»