Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

LaMothe v. LeBlanc

Supreme Court of Vermont

Decided March 15, 2013No. 2011-292Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Dooley, J.,

¶ 44. concurring in part and dissenting in part. In this case, the majority reverses and remands the prospective child support order for a guideline deviation decision. Although I do not agree with the analysis that reached that conclusion, as discussed below, my first response is that there already was a deviation decision by the magistrate, and father failed to appeal it to the superior court. Thus, there is no valid reason why mother should face another deviation determination. Since this point, fully and clearly demonstrated by the record, should end this appeal without the…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Mask v. MaskNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1980
  2. Rosenberg v. MeridaMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1998
  3. Grace Thru Faith v. CaldwellCourt of Appeals of Tennessee · 1996
  4. C.G.A. v. StateAlaska Supreme Court · 1992
  5. Brevard v. BrevardCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1985

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API