Mark V.H. v. Dolores J.M.

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Mark V.H. v. Dolores J.M.. Read the opinion of the Court — 232 W. Va. 378 →

West Virginia Supreme Court·Decided November 14, 2013·No. 13-0591·Separate

Opinion

No. 13-0591 – Mark H. v. Dolores M. FILED November 14, 2013 released at 3:00 p.m. RORY L. PERRY II, CLERK SUPREME COURT OF APPEALS OF WEST VIRGINIA

Justice Ketchum, concurring in part, and dissenting in part:

I would affirm the order of the circuit court, in toto. The majority incorrectly reversed

the part of the circuit court order allowing overnight visitation of the child with his father.

However, I agree the father should not be allowed to take the child out of state.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

No. 13-0591 – Mark H. v. Dolores M. FILED November 14, 2013 released at 3:00 p.m. RORY L. PERRY II, CLERK SUPREME COURT OF APPEALS OF WEST VIRGINIA

Justice Ketchum, concurring in part, and dissenting in part:

I would affirm the order of the circuit court, in toto. The majority incorrectly reversed

the part of the circuit court order allowing overnight visitation of the child with his father.

However, I agree the father should not be allowed to take the child out of state.

Mark V.H. v. Dolores J.M., (W. Va. 2013).

Pincite

Mark V.H. v. Dolores J.M. (Mark V.H. v. Dolores J.M.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.