This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

H and W were divorced on the grounds that they lived separate and apart for six consecutive months, and the resumption of marital relations was not reasonably probable. The final decree granted custody of the parties' child to H and gave plaintiff visitation rights. W appealed alleging that the trial court: (1) failed to give sufficient emphasis to plaintiff's role as primary caretaker of the parties' child; (2) found that defendant would be more likely to facilitate visitation; and (3) by made findings with regard to daycare that were incomplete and unsupported by the evidence. H cross-appealed, claiming that the trial court erred by failing to make a determination with regard to child support.

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.

Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.