Brenda Barr

The applicant brought a motion seeking an interim restraining order, exclusive possession of the matrimonial home, and primary residency of the children.

The respondent brought a countermotion seeking a nesting order or exclusive possession, and parenting time.

The court lifted the existing interim restraining order, finding the applicant's fears were not objectively legitimate to warrant the order.

The court granted the applicant exclusive possession of the matrimonial home, finding a nesting order inappropriate due to ongoing conflict.

The court ordered a parenting schedule providing the respondent with regular overnight parenting time and dismissed the applicant's request for interim sole decision-making as premature.

The applicant brought a motion to find the respondent mother in contempt for failing to comply with a prior court order requiring their two teenage daughters to return to in-person schooling.

The respondent admitted non-compliance, citing the children's refusal and her own beliefs aligned with a religious organization during the Covid-19 pandemic.

Relying on the Court of Appeal's decision in Bouchard v. Sgovio, the court declined to make an immediate contempt finding, instead utilizing its broad enforcement powers under Family Law Rule 1(8) to order the respondent to take specific steps to enroll the children for the upcoming school year.

The contempt motion was adjourned to monitor compliance.

The moving party failed to attend the family law trial, resulting in the dismissal of his spousal support claim and the trial proceeding in his absence.

Before final judgment was rendered, he retained counsel and brought a motion to reopen the trial.

The court applied the test for setting aside a default judgment by analogy, finding that while the moving party's explanation for his absence was inadequate, his spousal support claim had significant merit given the length of the marriage and income disparity.

To ensure procedural fairness, the court set aside the dismissal of the spousal support claim and reopened the trial for that issue only, but declined to reopen the property and equalization issues.