Court Opinion

ID: 9676419
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-24 05:24:07.913958+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:16:48.551602
License: Public Domain

HENDERSON, Justice
(concurring in result).
Spiritually, I agree with this decision but not with all of the authorities upon which it relies. Therefore, I concur in result.
It is my opinion that this very able and experienced trial judge carefully considered *549the “compelling reasons” thesis, for his memorandum opinion does express that he weighed “the other factors including the possible disruptive influence of resettling Nathan at this time_” (Emphasis added.) In Finding of Fact XXVIII, it does become apparent that the trial judge considered Nathan’s half brothers, for the trial judge mentioned the testimony of Dr. Arbes, who testified that Nathan had a “closeness to his stepbrothers.” It is best for precedent, and particularity in the ultimate holding, as the majority holds, that findings of fact and conclusions of law be entered with respect to the “compelling reasons” separating Nathan from his half brothers.