Kristina B. v. Edward B.

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that the superior court is “in a better position than we are to weigh the evidence and assess the credibility of witnesses”
• explaining that superior court is “in a better position than we are to weigh the evidence and assess the credibility of witnesses”
• discussing rebutting the presumption, and then evaluating domestic violence in the best interests analysis by saying the court’s findings regarding the presumption rebuttal were adequate to cover the best interests analysis
• first citing Limeres v. Limeres, 320 P.3d 291, 296 (Alaska 2014); then citing Nancy M. v. John M., 308 P.3d 1130, 1133 (Alaska 2013)
• “We afford particular deference to factual findings based primarily on oral testimony, because the trial court is better suited to judge the credibility of witnesses and weigh conflicting evidence.”
• “We afford particular deference to factual findings based primarily on oral testimony, because the trial court is better suited to judge the credibility of witnesses and weigh conflicting evidence.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).