Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Paquette v. Paquette

Supreme Court of Vermont

Decided June 21, 1985No. 83-193Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partBillings, C.J.

I concur with the majority opinion in that pursuant to a petition for custody, brought by a stepparent under 15 V.S.A. §§ 291 and 293, *93the trial court was in error in dismissing the petition, because the applicable statute, 15 V.S.A. § 291(g), clearly and plainly states that “ ‘children’ shall include stepchildren,” and this matter must be reversed and remanded for hearing.

I must dissent from the majority’s holding that the court was in error in denying plaintiff’s motion to amend the complaint, to request custody on behalf of a stepparent.

15 V.S.A. § 652(a) plainly and clearly states that…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Hill v. ConwaySupreme Court of Vermont · 1983
  2. Roberts v. SprayArizona Supreme Court · 1950
  3. Peck v. Counseling Service of Addison County, Inc.Supreme Court of Vermont · 1985
  4. Perry v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1980
  5. Town School District of St. Johnsbury v. Town School District of TopshamSupreme Court of Vermont · 1961

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