Edlund

Edlund v. Hales

Good Law
1998 Cal. App. LEXIS 827·66 Cal. App. 4th 1454·78 Cal. Rptr. 2d 671·98 Daily Journal DAR 10449·98 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 7552
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaSeptember 30, 1998No. A081949California8,885 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Phelan, J.

In this expedited appeal, Gregory T. Hales challenges an order under which his ex-wife, respondent Valerie M. Edlund, was allowed to move to Indiana with their daughter, Natalie. The challenged order modified an existing order of joint custody, under which Edlund had primary physical custody but Hales had regular visitation with Natalie. We issued a writ of supersedeas to maintain the status quo pending decision on the merits of Hales’s claims of error. Having carefully reviewed the record on appeal, and the parties’ briefs and arguments, we conclude the trial court did not abuse its discretion in issuing the move-away order, or in establishing a schedule for visitation after the move. Accordingly, we affirm.

I. Factual and Procedural Background

Hales and Edlund were married in June 1991. At the time, Edlund was working full-time as a dental hygienist, Hales was working as a real estate agent, and they were living in a house in Boulder Creek, which they purchased together shortly before they were married. Natalie was bom in September 1994, but her parents separated approximately seven months later, in April 1995. In May 1995, Edlund and Natalie moved into her aunt’s…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.