In Oliver N. v. State, Department of Health & Social Services,[1] the supreme court held new federal regulations issued by the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) materially changed the qualifications required of an expert testifying in a child in need of aid case under the Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA). The BIA issued formal regulations Continue Reading »
In Perry v. Perry,[1] the supreme court held that a court must presume that debt incurred during marriage is martial when equitably dividing marital assets upon divorce, and that a court may not rely solely on W-2s to determine income for child support purposes without considering other contrary and more recent evidence before it. Adam Continue Reading »
In Regina C. v. Michael C.,[1] the supreme court held that a mother committing the crime of custodial interference was a solid foundation for the superior court to modify the physical custody of her children. Regina and Michael C. were married in 2000 and had two children. In 2014, the couple divorced and in the Continue Reading »
In Sabrina V. v. State, Department of Health and Social Services,[1] the supreme court held that it was not an abuse of discretion for the superior court to decline to allow Sabrina V.’s untimely withdrawal of her voluntary relinquishment of parental rights. Sabrina V. signed a relinquishment of her parental rights to her son Kaleb Continue Reading »
In Saffir v. Wheeler,[1] the supreme court held that the superior court erred by failing to engage in proper symmetrical analysis of childcare stability and continuity in a child custody dispute, but did not abuse its discretion in not ordering protective measures to ensure the father’s sobriety while caring for the child. Saffir sought primary Continue Reading »
In Schwier v. Schwier,[1] the supreme court found that a father made a sufficient prima facie showing of changed circumstances which warranted an evidentiary hearing on a possible modification to an existing child support order. After being indicted on federal charges, Matthew Schwier was placed on house arrest and resigned from his job. Schwier filed Continue Reading »
In Steve H. v. State,[1] the supreme court held that the superior court did not clearly err in finding that a father had abandoned his child and terminating parental rights without consideration of the two-part common law test applied in other abandonment cases. Steve’s son was taken into emergency custody by the Office of Children’s Continue Reading »
In Thompson v. Thompson,[1] the supreme court held a 70/30 division of a fishing boat to be an inequitable split of marital property when the rest of the marital estate was divided 55/45. At some point during the marriage of Everett Thompson, a commercial fisherman, and Sharon Thompson, the couple purchased the fishing vessel F/V Continue Reading »
In Violet C. v. State, Department of Health & Social Service,[1] the supreme court held that the Office of Child Services (OCS) must make reasonable efforts to provide services to parents who face permanent termination of their parental rights, but its efforts need not be perfect. Following concerns over the mother’s substance abuse and the Continue Reading »
In Wilkins v. Wilkins,[1] the supreme court held that failure to value a party’s post-retirement health benefits for purposes of property division in legal separation or divorce proceedings is a reversible error. A key issue in the legal separation proceeding between Paul and Yvette Wilkins was ensuring that Ms. Wilkins’ was left with sufficient medical Continue Reading »
