Nature of the Case
To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.
Facts
H and W were married in 1982. H owned a small janitorial business and W worked in a restaurant. They had three children. During the marriage, W generally stayed home and cared for the children while H worked. H was forced to sell his business in 1984 and work for the new owner, but eventually, he was fired in 1988. H wanted to move to California for better job prospects. W moved with the children to Spokane to live with her parents until H could get established. H found a job and established a new family home in Irvine. W traveled to see the new home but did not tell H that she was planning a dissolution. When H arrived in Spokane to move the family, W told him the marriage was over. Testimony before the trial court indicated that W was the primary caregiver. However, W was not a model mother and left the children to chase after a new paramour and was cited twice for drunk driving. She was arrested for DUI after an accident in 1989. The children were in the car at the time and were placed in foster care for two days. An expert hired by H determined that W had a personality disorder and that would affect parenting; that expert met with both parents and tested both parents. Another expert hired by W recommended that the children be placed with the mother but had never met with D and had only met W a few days before the trial; that counselor said that 'Children can get along without a lot of things, but they don't get along well without nurturing from a mother.' The trial court gave custody to H. The Court of Appeals reversed; placement with the parent who had acted as a primary caregiver was required unless the child had been harmed by the conduct of the primary caregiver. This appeal resulted
Support@ bsmsphd.com
Casebriefs Co