-
Family Court Affirmed as Mutual Restraining Order Did Not Prohibit Party from Seeking Relief via DVO.
Lazar v. Lazar NO. 2023-CA-0145-ME Floyd Circuit Court Decided by Easton, Jones, and Lambert, Judges Opinion by Jones, Judge Date Rendered: August 25, 2023 Issue: Whether res judicata applies when a no contact order has been entered prior to a Petition for a DVO. In March of 2022, Husband grabbed Wife by the neck and…
-
CR 41.01 Not Effective to Dismiss Petition for Order of Protection Post-Judgment; CR 60.02 May Be Effective to Dismiss for “Extraordinary Reasons” or Clear Legal Necessity
CR 41.01 implicitly only applies to matters prior to a final judgment, noting that the rule allowing for a party to enter a notice of dismissal operating as an adjudication of the merits under some circumstances does not apply where the court has already adjudicated the merits of a case itself and entered judgment
-
Family Court Must Appoint Guardian ad Litem When Child Is Listed as Party in Domestic Violence Order Petition
The Court of Appeals remands the matter for additional proceedings as to the child holding that in DVO matters Smith “requires that a minor child who is listed as a party on the petition for protection is in need of an appointed guardian.”
Search
Recent Post
- Family Court (rather than Circuit Court) was Proper Forum for Claims Arising out of the Former Marriage of Parties
- United States Supreme Court Upholds Federal Statute Prohibiting Individuals Subject to Domestic Violence Orders from Possessing Firearms as Constitutional
- Supreme Court Strictly Enforces Rules of Appellate Procedure
- Family Court Violated Father’s Express Due Process Rights under KRS 403.300(3) by Allowing Testimony and Admitting Friend of the Court Report After Prohibiting Father from Taking the Deposition of Children’s Therapist Prior to Hearing
- Order Lacking CR 54.02 Finality Language Is Final When All Issues Are Resolved
