Legal Opinion

Conrad v. Atkins

Indiana Court of Appeals

Decided June 27, 2007No. 29A02-0606-CV-471PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

BAKER, Chief Judge.

Appellant-petitioner Brett Conrad1 appeals from the trial court’s order that, among other things, appointed appellees-cross-petitioners Thomas and Jeanne Atkins (collectively, the Atkinses) as co-guardians of Patrick Atkins and Patrick’s estate. Specifically, Brett raises the following arguments: (1) Brett should have been appointed as Patrick’s guardian or, at a minimum, should have visitation rights; (2) the trial court erred by declining to require Patrick’s physical attendance at trial and refusing to interview or meet with Patrick; (3) Patrick’s Charles Schwab…

Also in this document: Concurrence.

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Marriage of J.M. v. N.M.Indiana Court of Appeals · 2006
  2. V.S.D. v. Williams-HustonIndiana Court of Appeals · 1996
  3. Cunningham v. HastingsIndiana Court of Appeals · 1990

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. In Re Guardianship of PhillipsIndiana Court of Appeals · 2010
  2. In re the Guardianship of Hellen Kinney Morris: Mary M. Kinney and Patrick Kinney v. Paul Kevin KinneyIndiana Court of Appeals · 2016
  3. D.R. v. Carey Services, Inc.Indiana Court of Appeals · 2011
  4. Hudson v. ShoemakerIndiana Court of Appeals · 2010
  5. Guardianship of Sharon Izzo v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)Indiana Court of Appeals · 2017

4 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