Hayford v. Hayford

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that the issue of PPO termination was not moot despite the expiration of the PPO because the respondent stood to lose a weapons license required for his job
• holding that although the PPO had been terminated since the filing of the appeal, the entry of the PPO was not moot because it “may affect eligibility for a federal firearms license”
• holding that the trial court’s decision to issue and continue a PPO was not moot after the expiration of the PPO because the respondent could permanently lose his federal firearms license and livelihood
• explaining that with regard to custody and parenting time determinations, the trial court’s jurisdiction ends when the child reaches age 18
• stating that a trial court’s continuing jurisdiction regarding a parenting-time determination ends when a child reaches the age of majority
• reasoning that even if the respondent had “a partially legitimate motive for the contact,” evidence of the respondent’s unusual and extraordinary methods of obtaining information supported finding that the respondent was not acting for a legitimate purpose

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).