Sentences with phrase «not award custody»

The court will not award custody based upon the gender of the parent.

In making such determinations, the family courts of Hawaii do not award custody based on the parent's gender or wealth but on the best interests of the child.

For example, the judge can not award custody of pets, but the parties can come to an agreement between themselves concerning their custody arrangement of pets.

And, the plan can assist parties in creating a visitation plan in the event that one party is not awarded custody of a child

The parent not awarded custody is entitled to reasonable visitation.

The parent who is not awarded custody still has many important legal rights.

The parent not awarded custody receives visitation rights.

A parent in Wyoming who is not awarded custody of a child is still entitled to access to a child's medical, dental, and school records, equal to the rights of custodial parents.

And, the plan can assist parties in creating a visitation plan in the event that one party is not awarded custody of a child

Under Michigan law, grandparents are not awarded custody of a grandchild unless the court determines the parents are...

Not exact matches

The upshot is that «many do not attempt to be awarded custody of their children for fear of fighting a losing battle, even when welfare professionals agree that children would be better placed in their primary care.»

Even when one parent is awarded «sole» custody, courts will not terminate the child's relationship with her other parent, at least absent some significant and severe circumstances that might make contact with that parent unsafe.

Remember, too, that the court can award joint custody even if that's not what you're asking for at this time.

For example, if either parent has been convicted of domestic violence, the court will usually presume that he or she should not be awarded joint custody.

In addition, even if sole physical custody is awarded, there has a been a push to allowing more lenient visitation rights for the parent that does not live with the child.

However, just because the rule has been phased out, that does not mean that parents can not ask a judge to award custody to the mother.

If there is no agreement or if the agreement is not in the best interests of the child, the court shall award joint custody, unless custody by one parent is shown by clear and convincing evidence to serve the child's best interests.

While, in the past, the primary caretaker preference seemed just another way to award custody to mothers, as more and more men share parenting responsibilities, this preference does not necessarily favor mothers.

While I morally agree with this approach to awarding custody of a pet — I personally think of my pets as my kids, not property, and would always agree that a pet belongs in the best possible home — assigning «human» rights to pets can have unintended, game - changing consequences.

In determining who should be awarded custody, the court may want to consider which party has paid attention to the animal's basic daily needs (food, shelter, physical care, exercise, grooming, flea control); who takes the animal to the veterinarian; who provides for social interactions (in the case of dogs) with other dogs and / or with people; who maintains appropriate supervision to assure that state and local regulations are complied with (licensing, not allowing the dog to run free and protecting against circumstances that would endanger her life or health); and who has the greatest ability to financially support the animal.

The fact that the father had no rights of custody was also considered immaterial, if no plausible case had been made that rights of custody could not be awarded to him.

It took more than four years to get custody of my daughters awarded to me and this would not have ever happened without the help of the Coalition.

Sole legal custody may be awarded to one parent when the parties can not or will not co-parent.

Courts in South Carolina, where the adoptive parents lived, awarded custody to her birth father because ICWA's adoption procedure had not been followed.

Section 63-15-230 allows the court to award either joint or sole custody as it sees fit but does not express a preference between either.

However, there are situations where it may not be awarded such as if one parent is deemed unfit or if it would be in the child's best interests for one parent to have sole legal custody.

There is no reason to explain why he was awarded custody except that he was represented by an attorney who understood how to navigate the court system in order to obtain custody for his client, while Amber was not.

In 2012, Ms. Simon received the Denise O'Donnell Day Award from the Idaho State Bar for her pro bono representation of a single father who ultimately obtained a paternity order and award of primary custody of his child, over the mother's assertions that he was not the biological faAward from the Idaho State Bar for her pro bono representation of a single father who ultimately obtained a paternity order and award of primary custody of his child, over the mother's assertions that he was not the biological faaward of primary custody of his child, over the mother's assertions that he was not the biological father.

A Michigan judge says he was not aware he had awarded joint legal custody of a boy to a father accused of raping the boy's mother when she was...

Thus the family court did not err when awarding sole custody of the children to the mother and specifically declining to award joint custody.

The appellate court held that the family court did not abuse its discretion regarding the award of sole custody to the mother of the three minor children.

Alaska law also creates a «rebuttable presumption» (a legal assumption that has to be overcome with credible evidence to the contrary) that if an abusive parent has a history of committing domestic violence against the other parent, a child, or even a domestic living partner, the abusive parent must not be awarded sole legal custody, sole physical custody, joint legal custody, or joint physical custody.

On appeal Spreeuw argued that the family court erred in not awarding her sole physical custody and Barker argued that the family court erred in not awarding him primary legal custody.

Since custody was the primary issue at trial, it is not surprising that the court affirmed the award of attorney's fees.

However, the Court of Appeals affirmed the family court's decision not to award Husband joint custody.

W2000 -03067-COA-R3-CV (Tennessee Court of Appeals, February 5, 2002): The husband appealed the property division, denial of rehabilitative alimony, award of attorney's fees to wife, and decision not to hear evidence on child custody.

(Interestingly, the husband also claimed he should have been awarded custody, because although he suffered from depression and couldn't work, he was able to care for the children.)

The Supreme Court held that the trial court did not err in awarding full custody of the dog to the husband under Rule 60 (b)(6), even though the dog was marital property.

The self - represented appellant mother argued that the trial judge was biased, that he erred in his custody determination, and that he erred in not awarding spousal support.

In Cortina, the court upheld the trial judge's decision to award sole custody of teenage children to the father but varied the costs order to take into account the fact that a particular offer had expired three days before trial and thus was not in strict compliance with Rule 18 (14).

Mrs. Campbell admits that the Arizona court awarded Mr. Campbell custody and has not attacked the validity of that order.

At the time of the divorce in 2003, Mother was awarded sole legal custody and primary physical custody of the children, followed by her remarriage and relocation with the children to Texas in 2005, Father's relocation for 6 months to be near the children in Texas, Father's return to Arizona after not finding steady employment, Mother's separation from her new husband and subsequent move to an apartment with the children (that resulted in a change of schools).

In 2012 our legislature enacted S.C. Code § 63-15-230 (C), which reads, «If custody is contested or if either parent seeks an award of joint custody, the court shall consider all custody options, including, but not limited to, joint custody, and, in its final order, the court shall state its determination as to custody and shall state its reasoning for that decision.»

If a judge does not believe that you are capable of fostering a healthy relationship between your child and the other parent, you are less likely to be awarded custody or favourable access terms.

This issue should not be confused with the issue of Shared Parental Responsibility (legal custody), which is awarded to both parents in the vast majority of cases and which gives each parent the same right to participate in making important decisions affecting their children in areas such as education, medical care, religious upbringing, etc..

And it's also important to remember that even if one parent does not have custody of the children, the court may still award them child support, so that they will have the financial resources necessary to provide for the children in a manner consistent with their current standard of living.

In any event, this case is yet another indicator that, while equally shared physical custody is not a presumption, the courts continue to award ever more generous access to non-resident parents.

Court Intervention - If the two parents can not agree without the involvement of the court, the court will decide on which parent will be awarded physical custody and who will be awarded visitation rights.

In other words, if your spouse is behaving in a manner that is unreasonable and does not put your children's best interests at the forefront, the courts may award sole custody and primary residency of the children to you.

A parent who is not awarded interim custody, but who wishes to have physical custody in the future should attempt to maintain contact with the child, exercising their access rights whenever possible.