<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Virginia Lawyers Weekly &#187; Per Curiam Opinion</title>
	<atom:link href="http://valawyersweekly.com/tag/per-curiam-opinion/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://valawyersweekly.com</link>
	<description>VA Lawyers Weekly</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 24 May 2013 14:44:47 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Incarcerated Mom’s Rights Terminated&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/05/23/incarcerated-moms-rights-terminated/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/05/23/incarcerated-moms-rights-terminated/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 23 May 2013 15:08:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Deborah Elkins</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Family Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Opinion Digests]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Domestic Relations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Per Curiam Opinion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Virginia Court of Appeals]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/?p=74516</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Court of Appeals affirms termination of mother’s rights to her two children who were removed after two step-children ages three and four were severely injured and mother engaged in activity resulting in her incarceration on federal drug, perjury and felony child abuse charges with a mandatory minimum sentence of 15 years. Mother lived with [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/05/23/incarcerated-moms-rights-terminated/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Runaway Mom’s Rights Terminated&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/05/23/runaway-moms-rights-terminated/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/05/23/runaway-moms-rights-terminated/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 23 May 2013 15:01:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Deborah Elkins</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Family Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Opinion Digests]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Domestic Relations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Per Curiam Opinion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Virginia Court of Appeals]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/?p=74514</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Court of Appeals affirms terminating mother’s rights to her three-year old child for insufficient progress remedying the conditions requiring foster care; mother is an undocumented immigrant eight months pregnant with another child; her mother’s home is not suitable and the child is doing well with prospective adoptive parents. Mother had child in 2009 while [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/05/23/runaway-moms-rights-terminated/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Husband’s ED  Appeal Untimely&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/05/16/husbands-ed-appeal-untimely/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/05/16/husbands-ed-appeal-untimely/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 16 May 2013 18:19:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Deborah Elkins</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Family Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Opinion Digests]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Domestic Relations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Per Curiam Opinion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Virginia Court of Appeals]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/?p=74409</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A husband failed to timely appeal the final divorce decree awarding wife equitable distribution and ordering husband to reimburse wife for garnishment of her wages to pay their joint debt to husband’s brother, and he did not preserve his challenge to a finding of contempt against him, and the Court of Appeals summarily affirms the [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/05/16/husbands-ed-appeal-untimely/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Mom’s Reheard Custody Appeal Fails&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/05/09/moms-reheard-custody-appeal-fails/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/05/09/moms-reheard-custody-appeal-fails/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 09 May 2013 15:45:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Deborah Elkins</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Family Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Opinion Digests]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Domestic Relations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Per Curiam Opinion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Virginia Court of Appeals]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/?p=74264</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In a prior decision (Anderson v. Anderson VLW 013-7-075(UP)), the Court of Appeals found mother’s arguments procedurally defaulted  and summarily affirmed the trial court awarding custody of minor child to father after he moved to another county; on rehearing, the Court of Appeals summarily affirms again – mother’s due process rights were not violated; she [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/05/09/moms-reheard-custody-appeal-fails/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Home Sale, Fees to Husband Upheld&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/04/25/home-sale-fees-to-husband-upheld/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/04/25/home-sale-fees-to-husband-upheld/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 25 Apr 2013 14:33:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Deborah Elkins</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Family Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Opinion Digests]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Domestic Relations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Per Curiam Opinion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Virginia Court of Appeals]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/?p=74035</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Court of Appeals summarily affirms the trial court’s order approving the final accounting for the sale of the parties’ former marital residence and its award of attorney’s fees to husband; the trial court properly appointed husband’s counsel as special commissioner to effect the sale after wife refused to cooperate; husband as purchaser may obtain [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/04/25/home-sale-fees-to-husband-upheld/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Continuance Denial Upheld in Custody Case&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/04/17/continuance-denial-upheld-in-custody-case/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/04/17/continuance-denial-upheld-in-custody-case/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 17 Apr 2013 15:09:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Deborah Elkins</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Domestic Relations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Per Curiam Opinion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Virginia Court of Appeals]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/?p=73822</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Court of Appeals says a trial court did not err in declining to grant father a continuance of a custody and visitation hearing in response to father’s presentation that morning of a letter from new counsel requesting a hearing, and the lower court decision is affirmed. The trial court provided detailed reasons for denying [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/04/17/continuance-denial-upheld-in-custody-case/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Rights Terminated for Loss of Contact&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/04/17/rights-terminated-for-loss-of-contact/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/04/17/rights-terminated-for-loss-of-contact/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 17 Apr 2013 15:08:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Deborah Elkins</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Family Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Opinion Digests]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Domestic Relations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Per Curiam Opinion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Virginia Court of Appeals]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/?p=73820</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Court of Appeals upholds a trial court decision to terminate the parental rights of a mother who failed to maintain any contact with her child during her incarceration and failed to provide or plan for her child’s further for over six months after the child’s placement in foster care. The child was twice removed [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/04/17/rights-terminated-for-loss-of-contact/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Parental Rights Terminated for Long-Term Issues&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/04/17/parental-rights-terminated-for-long-term-issues/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/04/17/parental-rights-terminated-for-long-term-issues/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 17 Apr 2013 15:01:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Deborah Elkins</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Family Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Opinion Digests]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Domestic Relations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Per Curiam Opinion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Virginia Court of Appeals]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/?p=73818</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Court of Appeals upholds a trial court decision that termination of a couple’s parental rights is upheld in light of evidence these parents failed to correct the conditions that led to removal of their child. From 1997 to 2006, there were 10 founded Child Protective Services complaints against appellants involving filthy home conditions, inadequate [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/04/17/parental-rights-terminated-for-long-term-issues/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Incarcerated Dad Loses Parental Rights&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/04/17/incarcerated-dad-loses-parental-rights-2/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/04/17/incarcerated-dad-loses-parental-rights-2/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 17 Apr 2013 15:00:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Deborah Elkins</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Family Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Opinion Digests]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Domestic Relations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Per Curiam Opinion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Virginia Court of Appeals]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/?p=73816</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Although father claims his family members were not considered for placement of his child, born while he was incarcerated, the Court of Appeals upholds the trial court’s termination of parental rights of father. The department investigated father’s relatives as potential placement options. Father initially provided only his mother’s contact information. His mother would not permit [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/04/17/incarcerated-dad-loses-parental-rights-2/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Mother’s Arguments Procedurally Defaulted&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/04/17/mothers-arguments-procedurally-defaulted/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/04/17/mothers-arguments-procedurally-defaulted/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 17 Apr 2013 14:57:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Deborah Elkins</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Family Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Opinion Digests]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Domestic Relations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Per Curiam Opinion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Virginia Court of Appeals]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/?p=73814</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Court of Appeals affirms terminating mother’s rights to her son; mother’s arguments are procedurally defaulted and the record shows mother failed to substantially remedy the causes of foster care after she received appropriate services. Son was placed in foster care at the request of the local department of social services (DSS).  For two years, [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/04/17/mothers-arguments-procedurally-defaulted/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
