Remand Custody Issue to State Court in Teton County, WY
WYSC DECISION RE: FAMILY LAW – On December 28, 2012, the Wyoming Supreme Court held that “a relocation [by a custodial parent] may constitute a material change in circumstances” sufficient to trigger a best interest analysis under W.S. § 20-2-204(c) in the context of a custody modification case. Arnott v. Arnott, 2012 WY 167, ¶ 14, 39. (Arnott Opening Brief and Oral Argument by Leah Corrigan; Arnott Reply Brief by Pamela Parkins).
Caiazzo v. White, Case No. ST 2012-17
Dec 10, 2012
An order of protection was entered for one year against Mr. White.
I represented the Petitioner, Ms. Caiazzo, who filed for an order of protection against Mr. White on the grounds that he violated W.S. 6-2-506(b), a law in Wyoming prohibiting stalking. The Ninth Judicial Circuit Court ruled in favor of Ms. Caiazzo.
Almazan v. Hernandez, Case No. FV 2012-11
Nov 07, 2012
Court entered order of protection for one year against Mr. Hernandez.
I represented the Petitioner, Ms. Almazan, who filed for an order of protection against Mr. Hernandez on the grounds that he violated W.S. 35-21-102, a law in Wyoming prohibiting domestic violence. The Ninth Judicial Circuit Court of Teton County, Wyoming ruled in favor of Ms. Almazan.
Claman v. Popp, 2012 WY 92
Contracts and agreements
Jun 27, 2012
Summary Judgment Affirmed for Appelle
Our client, Appellee Popp, was sued for breaching the terms of a real estate contract involving the sale of her home in Rock Springs, Wyoming because she allegedly failed to disclose structural defects in the property. The trial court ruled in favor of Appellee Popp on summary judgment and the Wyoming Supreme Court Affirmed. (Appellee Brief authored by Pamela Parkins; Oral Argument by Leah K. Corrigan).
Part of a team of four litigators who represented twenty plaintiffs exposed to carbon monoxide after a heating unit in their dorm room failed. Participated in a three month jury trial ending in April of 2009. Authored appellate briefs concerning post-trial issues - See Hulstine v. Lennox Industries, Inc., 2010 MT 180, 237 P.3d 1277 (2010).
Case Remanded Following Appeal and Settled For Confidential Amount in Favor of Plaintiff
Plaintiff suffered a brain injury after slipping and falling in an enclosed area located in a nuclear plant in Idaho. Defendant successfully argued on summary judgment that it had no duty to keep Plaintiff safe from harm. Plaintiff appealed. The Idaho Supreme Court ruled that Defendant had a duty to take reasonable care to protect Plaintiff from harm. (Oral Argument by P. Richard Meyer; Appellate Briefs authored by Pamela T. Parkins and P. Richard Meyer).