Nature of the Case
To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.
Facts
H and W were divorced on the grounds that they lived separate and apart for six consecutive months, and the resumption of marital relations was not reasonably probable. The final decree granted custody of the parties' child to H and gave plaintiff visitation rights. W appealed alleging that the trial court: (1) failed to give sufficient emphasis to plaintiff's role as primary caretaker of the parties' child; (2) found that defendant would be more likely to facilitate visitation; and (3) by made findings with regard to daycare that were incomplete and unsupported by the evidence. H cross-appealed, claiming that the trial court erred by failing to make a determination with regard to child support.
Support@ bsmsphd.com
Casebriefs Co