Rembert v. Rembert

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding it was unlikely the parents would agree on the children's education and it was necessary to designate a \final decision-maker\ and no abuse of discretion where trial court selected primary custodial parent as that decision-maker
• “Thus, it is unlikely that they will agree on these issues; the need to designate a final decision-maker is apparent; and the trial court did not abuse its discretion in selecting the primary custodial parent as that decision-maker [in its joint custody award].”
• “Thus, it is unlikely that they will agree on these issues; the need to designate a final decision-maker is apparent; and the 13 trial court did not abuse its discretion in selecting the primary custodial parent as that decision-maker [in its joint custody award].”
• “Thus, it is unlikely that they will agree on these issues; the 22 need to designate a final decision-maker is apparent; and the trial court did not abuse its discretion in selecting the primary custodial parent as that decision-maker [in its joint custody award].”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).