By Rob Hagy, Law Offices of Rob Hagy, P.C., 154 Hansen Road, Suite 202B, Charlottesville, Virginia. Call (434)293-4562 for more information or email for more information at email@example.com. I look forward to helping you!
The information provided on this web blog is public information and is not individualized legal advice. Do not take any legal action on any information contained in this blog!!! Always consulting with an attorney in your state about your legal issues. The presentation of information on this blog does not establish any form of attorney-client relationship with my firm or with me. While I have attempted to maintain the information on this blog as accurately as possible, this information may contain errors or omissions, for which I disclaim any liability. Case law from other jurisdictions discussed here are discussed for comparative purposes only. The author is licensed to practice only in the Commonwealth of Virginia and not in any other state.
Despite the foregoing, this material could be considered to be ADVERTISING MATERIAL. The responsible party for this blog is Robert R. Hagy, II Esq., an attorney licensed to practice law in Virginia, of the Law Offices of Rob Hagy, P.C., whose address is 154 Hansen Rd., Suite 202-B, Charlottesville, Virginia 22911.
In the case of Hiller v. Fausey, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court ruled that a father's due process right to direct the care, custody, and control of his child was not unconstitutionally infringed by the application of a law statute allowing visitation or partial custody to grandparents upon death of child's parent.
In the case of Denise v. Turner, the Virginia Court of Appeals ruled that the trial court did not err in finding that a material change in circumstances had occurred and in finding it in the child’s best interests to award physical custody to father where the child had previously resided with the grandfather after the mother's death and with the consent of the father pursuant to an order of an out of state court.. The Virginia Court of Appeals also ruled that the trial court did not err in upholding the trial court's order that the father had to still share joint legal custody. Father argued that the court failed to apply the standard set forth in United States Supreme Court case, Troxel v. Granville. The Court of Appeals ruled that the best interests standard and not the Troxel standard applied because father had agreed to the child living with the grandfather previously.
In O'Donnell-Lamont and Lamont, the Oregon Supreme Court, in considering the appropriate application of changes that the legislature made to the third-party custody statute in 2001, following the United States Supreme Court's decision in Troxel v. Granville, affirmed the trial court’s award of custody of two children to maternal grandparents (grandparents) rather than to father.
Virginia Code Section 20-108.2 This provision of Virginia law sets forth the child support guidelines-a table of reference for determining the base monthly child support obligation.
Virginia Code Section 20-124.3 This statute sets forth the factors that a court will consider in divorce proceedings, temporary proceedings, or modification proceedings to determine what custody and visitation arrangement would be best for the child or children involved.