In Re Marriage of Horner

How courts have described this case

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

• holding issue to be \of a public nature\ because it involved interpretation of a statute and because the Court of Appeals' opinion was not limited to the facts
• holding issue to be “of a public nature” because it involved interpretation of a statute and because the Court of Appeals’ opinion was not limited to the facts
• noting that relocation statute \establishes a rebuttable presumption that the relocation of the child will be allowed\ (quoting Osborne v. Osborne (in re Osborne), 119 Wash.App. 133, 79 P.3d 465, 471 (2003))
• noting that relocation statute “establishes a rebuttable presumption that the relocation of the child will be allowed” (quoting Osborne v. Osborne (in re Osborne), 79 P.3d 465, 471 (Wash. Ct. App. 2003))
• a court may review a moot case if it presents issues of continuing and substantial public interest
• in determining whether trial court considered necessary factors, we may look to the order itself and whether the record establishes the existence of the factors

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).