Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Mullendore v. Mullendore

Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma

Decided September 24, 2012No. Nos. 108,740, 109,254Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partBarnes, P.J.

T 1 I respectfully concur in result with Part II of the Majority's Opinion. Although Father concedes the evidence shows this case is no longer considered high-conflict, he nevertheless argues that the trial court abused its discretion in terminating the parenting coordinator. He argues the evidence demonstrates that interaction and communication issues continue to cause some problems between the parents that upset the children. He concludes that continuing the parenting coordinator is in the children's best interests pursuant to 43 O.S8.2011 § 120.3(B) and, therefore, the trial court erred in…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Thielenhaus v. ThielenhausSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1995
  2. Stepp v. SteppSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1998

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API