A.O.V. v. J.R.V.
Virginia Court of Appeals
0219-06-4, Unpublished (2007)
- Written by Meredith Hamilton Alley, JD
Facts
A married couple had three children. The couple separated because the father was having extramarital affairs with men. Following the separation, the father established a household with his male paramour. In the divorce proceedings, the father and his paramour testified that during the father’s parenting time, the father and his paramour referred to each other as “roommates” or “friends” and did not show affection to each other. The paramour did not stay in the couple’s shared home while the children were there. The mother testified that the children did not show any ill effects from the father’s parenting time. The trial court found that the father and mother were both good parents and that the children needed both of their parents. The trial court awarded joint custody to the father and mother, with primary custody to the mother and parenting time to the father. The father was forbidden from having a romantic partner stay overnight or showing affection to a romantic partner during parenting time. Both parties appealed: the mother argued that the trial court should have granted her sole custody and forbidden the father from exposing the children to homosexuality, while the father argued that the trial court should not have placed conditions on parenting time.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Benton, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 814,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.