Cases

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE AMBER MOORE,1 § § No. 393, 2024 Respondent Below, § Appellant, § Court Below–Family Court § of the State of Delaware v. § § File No. CN24-01339 MICHELLE MOORE,

[Cite as Moore v. Moore, 2025-Ohio-88.] IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO SEVENTH APPELLATE DISTRICT MONROE COUNTY ERIC D. MOORE, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. KAYLA R. MOORE, Defendant-Appellant.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE GAGE MOORE,1 § § No. 291, 2022 Respondent Below, § Appellant, § Court Below—Family Court of § the State of Delaware v. § § File No. CN20-01144

Moore v Moore (2023 NY Slip Op 02656) Moore v Moore 2023 NY Slip Op 02656 Decided on May 17, 2023 Appellate Division, Second Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.

[Cite as Bott Moore v. Moore, 2024-Ohio-5692.] IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO TENTH APPELLATE DISTRICT April Bott Moore, : Plaintiff-Appellant, : No. 23AP-734 v. : (C.P.C. No. 16DR-00209) Robert Dean Moore, : (R

*********************************************** The “officially released” date that appears near the be- ginning of each opinion is the date the opinion will be pub- lished in the Connecticut Law Journal or the date it was released as a slip opinion. The operative date for the be- ginning of all time periods for filing postopinion motions and petitions for certification is the “officially released” date appearing in the opinion. All opinions are subject to modification and technical corr

[Cite as Moore v. Moore, 2022-Ohio-1862.] IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO TENTH APPELLATE DISTRICT April Bott Moore, : Plaintiff-Appellant/ : Cross-Appellee, : No. 21AP-276 v. (C.P.C. No. 16DR-209)

[Cite as Moore v. Moore, 2021-Ohio-4010.] COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO EIGHTH APPELLATE DISTRICT COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA ANDREA MOORE, : Plaintiff-Appellee, : No. 109999 v. : GREGORY MOORE, : D

Nebraska Supreme Court Online Library www.nebraska.gov/apps-courts-epub/ 05/03/2019 09:08 AM CDT - 588 - Nebraska Supreme Court A dvance Sheets 302 Nebraska R eports MOORE v. MOORE Cite as 302 Neb. 588 Lucinda D. Moore, ap

Denied.

Wood, J., joins.

Nebraska Supreme Court Online Library www.nebraska.gov/apps-courts-epub/ 06/14/2019 09:08 AM CDT - 588 - Nebraska Supreme Court A dvance Sheets 302 Nebraska R eports MOORE v. MOORE Cite as 302 Neb. 588 Lucinda D. Moore, ap

Freudenberg, J. *317 I. NATURE OF CASE The ex-husband appeals from the district court's order that he reimburse his ex-wife for half of certain "work related daycare expense[s]" for the parties' three children, as required by the dissolution decree, and as required by N

Denied.

SHORT, J.: **28In this divorce action involving cross-appeals, Debra Moore (Wife) appeals, arguing the family court erred in reducing the amount of her alimony. Lee Moore (Husband) also appeals, arguing the family court erred in (1) not sufficiently reducing his alimony obligation and (2) finding Husband presented no evidence to support his claim

APPEALS NOT ACCEPTED FOR REVIEW

Atcheson, J.: *612 SUMMARY OF CASE AND DISPOSITION The central issue in this case turns on whether Steven Moore manipulated John and Joyce Moore, his parents, to part with land they owned, thereby gutting a trust they had set up as an estate plan to benefit all four of

Nebraska Supreme Court Online Library www.nebraska.gov/apps-courts-epub/ 11/24/2020 08:07 AM CST - 101 - Nebraska Court of Appeals Advance Sheets 29 Nebraska Appellate Reports GANDARA-MOORE v. MOORE Cite as 29 Neb. App. 101 Tracy D. Gandara-Moore, a

[Cite as Moore v. Moore, 2018-Ohio-1545.] IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO SIXTH APPELLATE DISTRICT ERIE COUNTY Diane J. Moore Court of Appeals Nos. E-17-011 Appellee Trial Court Nos. 2015-DR-0064 v. Gerry L. Moore DECISION AND JUDGMENT Appellant Decid

Ellington, Presiding Judge. Thaddeus L. Moore ("Appellant") and Heather C. Moore ("Appellee") divorced in 2009. The divorce decree, through the settlement agreement incorporated therein, provided that the parties share joint legal custody of their minor child and that Appellee have primary physical custody of the child subject to Appellant's visitation rights. The parties also agreed th