The applicant mother sought an urgent motion to suspend the respondent father's in-person access to their six-year-old daughter, proposing video contact instead, citing concerns about the father's adherence to COVID-19 safety precautions.
The court dismissed the motion, finding it not urgent, emphasizing that the mother's allegations did not establish the father was irresponsible or unsafe, and criticized the "nuclear option" approach without exploring less restrictive solutions or good faith communication.
