Quimbee logo
DMCA.com Protection Status
From our private database of 18,300+ case briefs...

Morgan v. Foretich

United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
546 A.2d 407 (D.C. Cir. 1988)


Jean Morgan (plaintiff) and Eric Foretich (defendant) were divorced. The trial court awarded Morgan custody of H, their daughter. Foretich was given liberal visitation. Two months after the trial court’s order, Morgan began accusing Foretich of sexually abusing H and refused to allow Foretich to visit H. The court appointed a guardian ad litem to represent the interests of H. Foretich filed a motion to hold Morgan in contempt for her refusal to comply with the court order and for a change of custody. Morgan filed a motion to temporarily suspend visitation and compel discovery. At a hearing, the trial court found that Morgan had failed to prove that Foretich abused H, but held that Morgan had willfully disobeyed the court order without justification. The trial court held Morgan in contempt. Morgan appealed. The appellate court affirmed the judgment of the trial court. Later, the trial court began a series of hearings on (1) Foretich’s motion for a change of custody and termination of Morgan’s parental rights and (2) Morgan’s cross-motion to suspend Foretich’s visitation or, in the alternative, to require supervised visitation. During the hearings, the trial judge expanded the visitation schedule, granting Foretich a number of overnight visitations and weekends with H. Subsequently, the trial court entered an order allowing Foretich to have an extended, two-week visitation with H toward the end of the summer. Morgan immediately filed an emergency motion to stay enforcement of the extended visitation pending an appeal. The appellate court denied Morgan’s appeal. Morgan refused to comply with the extended visitation order, hid H’s whereabouts from Foretich, and refused to reveal H’s location. After a hearing to show cause as to why Morgan had not complied with the court’s order, Morgan was found in contempt and incarcerated. Morgan appealed.

Rule of Law


Holding and Reasoning (Steadman, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 487,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.

Here's why 487,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 18,300 briefs, keyed to 985 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.

Questions & Answers

Have a question about this case?

Sign up for a free 7-day trial and ask it

Sign up for a FREE 7-day trial