Hughes v. Christensen

Printer-friendly versionPrinter-friendly versionPDF versionPDF version

Hughes v. Christensen

Case Number
Court Number
Call Date
October 11, 2022
Case Time
9:00 AM
Case Summary

A-22-0080, Emmett Hughes (appellant) v. Lexus Christensen

Hall County, District Court, Judge John H. Marsh

Attorney for Appellant: Self-Represented at Oral Argument; Mitchell C. Stehlik (Stehlik Law Firm), Limited Scope—Briefs Only

Attorney for Appellee: David V. Chipman (Monzón, Guerra & Chipman)

Child Custody Action; In Loco Parentis

Action Taken by Trial Court: Hughes, alleging in loco parentis status, sought custody or visitation rights over his ex-girlfriend’s son; Christensen is Hughes’ ex-girlfriend. Following trial, the district court found that Hughes was no longer in loco parentis to Christensen’s son and dismissed his complaint.

Assignments of Error on Appeal: Hughes claims that the district court erred when it found that he was no longer in loco parentis to Christensen’s son, failed to grant him custody or visitation rights, and refused to allow him to present evidence regarding Christensen’s parental unfitness.

Case Location
Court Type
District Court
Schedule Code
Panel Text
Pirtle, Chief Judge, Bishop and Arterburn, Judges