For children caught in the middle of a divorce, few things feel more uncertain (or more frightening) than not knowing what their daily life will look like going forward. Continue reading →
Our last blog covered the facts of Williamson v. Smith (909 S.E.2d 926). Father argued that the custody order was permanent, while the mother argued that it was not. Continue reading →
The term “permanent” in a custody order holds extra weight at first glance. After all, if the title says “Permanent Custody Order”, it’s easy to assume that the arrangement can only be changed if something occurs that is substantial enough to garner the court’s attention. Continue reading →
Custody cases can move quickly when a judge believes a child’s relationship with a parent may be jeopardized, and that can be stressful for everyone involved. But even a huge change in custody isn’t always the final say on a case. Continue reading →
We will discuss how North Carolina courts treat substantial changes in circumstances in child custody disputes through the lens of the North Carolina Court of Appeals case Coggin v. Brennan.
Child custody disputes are among the most common family law matters in court. Yet, due to the sensitive nature of the relationships and the complexity of the law, these cases can yield very different outcomes depending on the smallest details. Continue reading →
Self-executing modifications are provisions within a contract or order that amend the terms upon a specified event that may occur in the future. The legality of these provisions varies from state to state; some states have determined that self-executing modifications are typically illegal, and others have yet to make any clear or definitive decisions about the legality of such terms.
The North Carolina Court of Appeals case of Madison v. Gonzalez-Madison involved a self-executing modification in a custody order, and the appellate court’s ruling provided clarification on North Carolina’s laws regarding this issue. Continue reading →
Parents and guardians who wish to change their child custody order typically must file a motion to modify. Additionally, the parent who files the motion, sometimes referred to as the moving party, must prove that there has been a substantial change in circumstances that impacts the child’s wellbeing.
Can a trial court choose to modify a custody order even when neither parent has filed a motion to modify? Not generally, but a recent Court of Appeals case highlighted a specific scenario in which this might occur. Continue reading →
In custody and visitation cases, grandparents are considered third parties. North Carolina does not allow third parties to seek custody or visitation unless certain conditions are met. First, filing for visitation requires that the child’s family is not intact, which means there must be an ongoing issue like an open custody case or adoption proceedings. Continue reading →
Jurisdiction is the authority of a particular court to hear and rule on a case, and it is a crucial part of any court proceeding. There are multiple types of jurisdiction, such as territorial and subject matter. Territorial jurisdiction refers to a court’s ability to hear cases relating to a certain geographic area. Subject matter jurisdiction determines a court’s authority to hear certain types of cases, like child custody and divorce.
While this may seem straightforward, jurisdiction can easily become a contested issue that can greatly impact the outcome of a case. Continue reading →
North Carolina Divorce Lawyers Blog