Nevada Supreme Court· 9/22/2005

Potter v. Potter

Citations

119 P.3d 1246
121 Nev. 613
121 Nev. Adv. Rep. 60
2005 Nev. LEXIS 72

How courts have described this case

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

recognizing that a party seeking relocation is subject to different requirements depending on whether the party is a joint or primary custodian
recognizing that a party seeking relocation is subject to different requirements depending on whether the party is a joint or primary custodian
stating that a parent must have primary physical custody of the minor child before filing a petition to relocate with that child under NRS 125C.200
stating that a parent must have primary physical custody of the minor child before filing a petition to relocate with that child under NRS 125C.200
indicating that, when considering a request for relocation, the district court may consider “whether one parent had de facto primary custody of the child prior to the motion”
indicating that, when considering a request for relocation, the district court may consider \whether one parent had de facto primary custody of the child prior to the motion\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Becker, Rose, Maupin, Gibbons, Douglas, Hardesty, Parraguirre

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

19 cases in this archive cite this case.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.