Opinion ID: 1989497
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: Father's Motion to Reopen Judgment

Text: On August 28, 2002, Father filed a motion to reopen the Family Court's judgment [5] and an affidavit for priority scheduling. He stated that, due to a miscommunication about childcare, he had arrived at the Family Court at 9:12 a.m., at which time he was told that the hearing had concluded. Father further stated that primary placement should not have been granted to Mother because of her past mental health problems and risk to the health and well-being of the children. [6] Mother responded to Father's motion and denied continuing mental health problems and that she had endangered the health of the children. She attached to her response copies of reports regarding the health problems of the parties' Down's syndrome child. The Family Court denied the motion to reopen the judgment, stating that Father had alleged no facts constituting excusable neglect.