In re Marriage of Rideout
Washington Supreme Court
77 P.3d 1174 (2003)
- Written by Meredith Hamilton Alley, JD
Facts
Christopher Rideout (defendant) and Sara Rideout (plaintiff) were divorced with two children, Kit and Caroline. Just before Caroline’s thirteenth birthday, Christopher repeatedly informed Sara that he wanted to exercise his summer parenting time, starting July 14, 2000. Sara did not make Caroline available for Christopher’s parenting time and told Christopher that Caroline was going to stay with Sara instead. Christopher sought and was granted a court order for Sara to take Caroline to Christopher’s house for parenting time beginning on July 27, 2000, but Sara did not comply. Christopher filed a motion for contempt of court for Sara’s failure to comply on July 27, 2000. At the hearing, Sara produced Caroline’s declaration that Caroline did not want to spend parenting time with Christopher. The court commissioner found that Sara inappropriately involved Caroline in the matter, influenced Caroline’s bad attitude towards parenting time with Christopher, and caused Caroline to write the statement. The commissioner further found that Sara could have required Caroline to comply with parenting time and did not. The commissioner found that Sara acted in bad faith and was in contempt of court for the July 27, 2000, incident and ordered her to pay Christopher’s attorney’s fees and costs related to that date. The trial court adopted the ruling. Sara appealed, arguing that her failure to comply with the court order was not in bad faith because she tried to convince Caroline to comply.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Alexander, C.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.