BarbaraPerez88 PA201 Unit9 Assignment Doc
Barbara Perez
Unit 9 Assignment
PA201: Introduction to Legal Research
Professor: Carlene DiPrenda
January 20, 2015
Part 1:
Secondary Sources:
The first source I have chosen is Anna Sortun, REBUTTING THE PARENTAL PRESUMPTION IN OREGON: SUBSTANTIATING EMOTIONAL BONDS AFTER TROXEL V. GRANVILLE, 82 Or. L. Rev. 1191 (2003).
This article discusses what is best for a child and how each situation can be is uniquely delicate. It also talks about the continuity, attachment, and emotional impact of removing a child from the care of long-term caregivers, such as grandparents.
The second source I chose is Philip F. Schuster II, CONSTITUTIONAL AND FAMILY LAW IMPLICATIONS OF THE SLEEPER AND TROXEL CASES: A DENOUEMENT FOR OREGON'S PSYCHOLOGICAL PARENT STATUTE?, 36 Willamette L. Rev. 549 (2000).
This article discusses the implication on law regarding both the “Sleeper” and “Troxel” cases. It also discusses the relationship that children share with their siblings, grandparents, teachers, ministers, and neighbors, and it shows how significant these relationships can be to the child.
The third source I found is FAMILY TIES: Family Law Practitioners Await Clarification of Nonparental Rights, Or. St. B. Bull. 9 (2000).
This article discusses the growing number of custodial grandparents. It also addresses the visitation right and custodial right for nonparents.
Cases:
1. This first case I chose was Beard v. Hamilton, 512 So. 2d 1088 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1987).
Facts:
Ann and Eugene Beard appeal the order of the trial court dismissing their motion for visitation with their grandchild. Appellants' daughter passed away and their son-in-law, Paul Hamilton, the father, remarried. The stepmother, Sharon Hamilton, adopted the child on April 30, 1984, at which time the grandparents had no court-ordered visitation rights. Nevertheless, the grandparents did have, at the time of the adoption, a motion for visitation pending since May of 1983. Seemingly, no notices of the
Unit 9 Assignment
PA201: Introduction to Legal Research
Professor: Carlene DiPrenda
January 20, 2015
Part 1:
Secondary Sources:
The first source I have chosen is Anna Sortun, REBUTTING THE PARENTAL PRESUMPTION IN OREGON: SUBSTANTIATING EMOTIONAL BONDS AFTER TROXEL V. GRANVILLE, 82 Or. L. Rev. 1191 (2003).
This article discusses what is best for a child and how each situation can be is uniquely delicate. It also talks about the continuity, attachment, and emotional impact of removing a child from the care of long-term caregivers, such as grandparents.
The second source I chose is Philip F. Schuster II, CONSTITUTIONAL AND FAMILY LAW IMPLICATIONS OF THE SLEEPER AND TROXEL CASES: A DENOUEMENT FOR OREGON'S PSYCHOLOGICAL PARENT STATUTE?, 36 Willamette L. Rev. 549 (2000).
This article discusses the implication on law regarding both the “Sleeper” and “Troxel” cases. It also discusses the relationship that children share with their siblings, grandparents, teachers, ministers, and neighbors, and it shows how significant these relationships can be to the child.
The third source I found is FAMILY TIES: Family Law Practitioners Await Clarification of Nonparental Rights, Or. St. B. Bull. 9 (2000).
This article discusses the growing number of custodial grandparents. It also addresses the visitation right and custodial right for nonparents.
Cases:
1. This first case I chose was Beard v. Hamilton, 512 So. 2d 1088 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1987).
Facts:
Ann and Eugene Beard appeal the order of the trial court dismissing their motion for visitation with their grandchild. Appellants' daughter passed away and their son-in-law, Paul Hamilton, the father, remarried. The stepmother, Sharon Hamilton, adopted the child on April 30, 1984, at which time the grandparents had no court-ordered visitation rights. Nevertheless, the grandparents did have, at the time of the adoption, a motion for visitation pending since May of 1983. Seemingly, no notices of the
Links: http://extension.oregonstate.edu/fch/sites/default/files/documents/legal_rapp_09.pdf http://www.oregon.gov/dhs/spwpd/pages/sua/legal-assistance.aspx On the Oregon government website you can find the “Elder Law Handbook”, which includes information about legal rights and public benefits for seniors, including information about legal issues such as visitation and custody rights for grandparents. I strongly advise that your take a look at the information to have a better idea of what your legal rights are and I would also suggest that you take a look at OregonLegalResearch.com. This site contains lots of information rand free resources regarding grandparents’ right as well as Oregon’s Revised Statutes. I hope that this information is helpful to you and I welcome you to contact me back at my office should you have any further questions. Thank you for your time, Barbara Perez, Paralegal