In re the Marriage of Katare
Court of Appeals of Washington
1Opinion of the Court
¶1 — Under RCW 26.09.191, a trial court has authority to impose limitations in a parenting plan. Brajesh Katare contends the trial court erred in adopting restrictions designed to prevent him from taking his children out of the United States and limiting his visits to a two-county area in Florida until the youngest child turns five despite its finding that the factors in RCW 26.09.191 did not apply. Brajesh also contends the court abused its discretion when it refused to order additional time with his children if he is unable to travel to Florida and the trial court erred when it required him…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Santosky v. KramerSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
- Troxel v. GranvilleSupreme Court of the United States · 2000
- In re the Marriage of LittlefieldWashington Supreme Court · 1997
- In Re Marriage of LittlefieldWashington Supreme Court · 1997
- Smith v. Stillwell-SmithWashington Supreme Court · 1998
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- In re the Marriage of KatareWashington Supreme Court · 2012
- In re the Marriage of RaskobCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2014
- Daniel R. Audette v. Elaina D. AudetteCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2020
- In re the Marriage of KatareWashington Supreme Court · 2012
- In re the Marriage of KatareCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2004
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.