Child Custody Cases
Show: 1 day 1 week 1 month All
Custom (decided): –
Sort: Newest first A–Z
Coverage since June 2, 2026
✉️ New decisions, briefed in your inbox every morning — subscribe to Daily Case Law, free →

Child Custody

WyomingAppellate ProcedureChild Custodydomestic-violence
Wyoming Supreme Court
Uncategorized

Idler — Divorce Appeal Summarily Affirmed Where Counsel’s Briefs Lacked Cogent Argument

/

The Wyoming Supreme Court summarily affirmed a divorce decree granting Mother sole custody of ten children and assigning nearly all marital debt to incarcerated Father, holding that Father’s nine-issue opening brief contained no cogent argument — just general legal principles with no case-specific analysis — and that his reply brief improperly raised four new issues while failing to respond to Mother’s arguments. Attorney fees under W.R.A.P. 10.05 were declined as a matter of discretion, but costs were awarded.

WyomingChild CustodyCivil ProcedureFamily Law
Wyoming Supreme Court
Uncategorized

Ribera v. Ribera — Wyoming Supreme Court Affirms Divorce Decree on Custody, Property Division, and Rule 35 Motion

/

The Wyoming Supreme Court affirmed a Park County divorce decree awarding Mother primary custody and $624,500 in equitable distribution, holding that Father’s W.R.C.P. 35 motion for psychological evaluations was untimely and lacked good cause, that the district court properly reached assets Father transferred to his nonprofit during the proceedings under the badges-of-fraud doctrine from Breitenstine, and that Father was barred by invited error from challenging the shared custody arrangement for the family dog.

MassachusettsChild CustodyFamily LawGuardianship
Massachusetts Appeals Court
Uncategorized

Guardianship of Finley — Massachusetts Court Lacked Jurisdiction Over Newborn’s Custody Where New Hampshire Was Home State Under MCCJA

/

The Massachusetts Appeals Court vacated four years of guardianship proceedings and remanded for dismissal, holding that the Probate and Family Court never had subject matter jurisdiction over a newborn’s custody under the Massachusetts Child Custody Jurisdiction Act (MCCJA) because New Hampshire—not Massachusetts—was the child’s home state, and the concurrent New Hampshire proceeding independently barred the Massachusetts action under G. L. c. 209B, § 2(d).

North CarolinaAppellate ProcedureChild CustodyJuvenile Law
North Carolina Court of Appeals
Uncategorized

In re J.Q. — Trial Court Erred by Ceasing Reunification Efforts at Review Hearing; Only Permanency Planning Hearings Authorize That Step

/

The North Carolina Court of Appeals vacated a review-hearing order ceasing reunification efforts, holding that N.C.G.S. § 7B-906.2(b) reserves that power exclusively for permanency planning hearings; the trial court’s failure to schedule a permanency planning hearing within the statutory thirty-day window was an error but not prejudicial on appeal, with mandamus the proper real-time remedy.

TexasChild CustodyCivil ProcedureFamily Law
Texas Court of Appeals, Seventh District (Amarillo)
Uncategorized

Bracken v. Bracken — Default Divorce Judgment Reversed Because Pro Se Party Received No Notice of Trial After Attorney Withdrew Without Following Rule 10

/

The Seventh Court of Appeals reversed a post-answer default judgment in a divorce case, holding that a pro se defendant received no notice of the trial setting after her attorneys withdrew without serving her by certified mail as required by Rule 10, and that subsequent electronic-only service failed to comply with the trial court’s own notice order and could not trigger the Rule 21a presumption of receipt.

MontanaChild CustodyConstitutionalFamily Law
Montana Supreme Court
Uncategorized

Helt v. Guess — Order of Protection’s Child-Contact Ban Reversed for Lack of Statutory Child-Specific Findings

/

The Montana Supreme Court affirmed a protection order protecting the petitioner from the respondent but reversed the child-related provisions—including the elimination of all parenting contact—holding that Montana Code Annotated § 40-15-204(4) requires child-specific findings that the child was a victim of, witnessed, or was endangered by abuse, and that the court must explain why supervised visitation would not adequately address the proven safety concerns before imposing a total contact ban.

Scroll to Top