Wylita Clark

The respondent father brought a motion seeking an order directing the applicant mother to ensure their 12-year-old daughter is vaccinated against COVID-19, as well as police enforcement of a 2017 parenting order and a finding of contempt.

The mother opposed forcing the child to be vaccinated against her will.

The court dismissed the contempt motion due to improper service.

On the vaccination issue, the court declined to take judicial notice of government information regarding the safety and efficacy of the COVID-19 vaccine.

The court found the child to be a mature minor capable of making her own medical decisions and strongly opposed to the vaccine.

The motion was dismissed in its entirety.

The applicant mother brought a motion for temporary sole custody of the parties' child.

The respondent father had unilaterally relocated with the child and repeatedly denied the mother access, failing to comply with a previous court order for access.

The father raised uncorroborated allegations of substance abuse and physical abuse against the mother.

The court found the father was actively attempting to sever the child's relationship with the mother.

To preserve the relationship and in the child's best interests, the court granted temporary sole custody to the mother, with scheduled access for the father.

The plaintiffs, owners of a 50-acre parcel and an adjacent 200-acre parcel, sought declaratory and injunctive relief regarding a right-of-way over the defendant's farm.

The plaintiffs intended to develop the property and sought declarations permitting them to alter the right-of-way for year-round vehicular access, remove gates, and access the 200-acre parcel.

The court dismissed the action, finding that the proposed development lacked municipal approval, making the requested declarations hypothetical.

The court also held that the plaintiffs could not use the right-of-way to access the 200-acre parcel, which was not the dominant tenement.