Newspaper Tidbit: 45 Years After

The Free Lance. - Fredericksburg, VA
March 17, 1910

45 YEARS AFTER

Three companies of Mosby's men, under Capt. Baylor, were engaged in a fight in Fairfax, near Reynolds Cross Roads, two days after Lee's surrender.  In this fight were W. B. Lynn, W. N. Tansill and E. D. Cole.  After the fight was over Messrs. Tansill and Cole were missing and Lynn reported both of them killed or captured.  On Saturday, 45 years afterwards, Lynn wrote here and obtained the signatures of Cole and Tansill to his application for a Confederate pension.

We knew Mr. Tansill was a good sleeper, but did not know he had ever been reported as gone to his long sleep.

APRIL FOOL 2011

With all the changes taking place in our procedures and forms at the moment, it would have been very easy to fall for the April Fool across at Jordans Family Law today when they announced that the latest Practice Direction requires child friendly clothing in the family courts. Perhaps it’s just me, but actually the idea of Judges in polka dot robes designed by Cath Kidson has a certain appeal.

FAMILY JUSTICE REVIEW INTERIM REPORT: RESOLUTION RESPONSE

Resolution welcomed the interim report on the family justice system in England and Wales published by the UK Government’s Family Justice Review Panel and referred to in this blog yesterday.

“We whole-heartedly agree with the Justice Review Panel’s view that long and complicated legal processes are emotionally and financially draining for parents and distressing for children,” said David Allison, Chair of Resolution.

“The report’s emphasis on encouraging separating couples to consider non-court dispute resolution services, and assessing whether they need parenting information, is potentially very positive. As the report seems to acknowledge, it will be important to ensure that mediation is not seen as a panacea for all couples and that other non-court options such as collaborative law are also promoted.”

The Justice Review Panel proposes to make it compulsory for all parties seeking to litigate to first be assessed by a mediator for suitability for a parenting information programme and for use of a dispute resolution service such as mediation. The mediator would then give a certificate to allow a court application.

“It will be very important to ensure that assessments of separating couples are carried out by trained professionals who are familiar with all types of dispute resolution processes,” said David Allison.

The panel does not recommend that dispute resolution be compulsory, but that courts should take into account what attempts have been made to resolve the issue before seeking litigation.

Resolution also warmly welcomed recommendations including the creation of a unified family court, which would include all levels of the family judiciary, and improved judicial continuity to reduce the extent to which families appear before a different judge each time they go to court.

The organisation said that a proposed online information hub for parents must provide clear information on how family lawyers can help resolve family problems and on the full range of available dispute resolution services.

David Norgrove, Chair of the Family Justice Review Panel, is the keynote speaker tomorrow at Resolution’s national conference which is currently taking place in Cardiff.

Will: David Woodyard

DAVID WOODYARD Will

Prince William County Will Book  M, pg 445

19 Jul 1826; proved 02 Oct 1826

In the name of God Amen I DAVID WOODYARD of Prince William County & State of Virginia being sick and weak in body but of sound mind and disposing memory thanks be given unto God therefore calling to mind the mortality of my body and knowing that it is appointed for all men once to die do make and ordain this my last will and testament that is to say principally and first of all I leave my body to be buried in Christian like burial at the discretion of my Executor and as touching such worldly estate wherewith it has pleased God to bless me with in this life I give and dispose of the same in the following manner and form first I give to ELIZABETH WOODYARD my beloved wife all my stock of every discription together with all my household goods debts and moveable effects during her natural life and it is my will and desire that she shall keep the same without security.  I give and bequeath to my beloved son JOHN WOODYARD whom I likewise constitute and ordain my sole Executor of this my last will and testament one feather bed stead and furniture and my shot gun.  I give and bequeath to my beloved son WALTER WOODYARD one feather bed and furniture and two head of sheep.  I also give to my beloved daughter SUSANNAH WOODYARD one feather bed stead and furniture and two head of sheep and it is my will and desire that what remains at the decease of my wife shall be equally divided amongst my five children and I do hereby revoke and disannul every other former testaments wills and bequests and Executors by me in any ways before named confirming this to be my last will and testament in witness whereof I have hereunto set my hand and seal the day and date above written.

DAVID WOODYARD

Signed sealed published and declared by the said DAVID WOODYARD as his last will and testament, in presence of us the subscribers,

WILLIAM WOODYARD, DOUGLASS CONNER

At a Court held for Prince William County this 2^nd day of October 1826.  This will of DAVID WOODYARD deceased was presented to the Court and being proved by the oaths of WILLIAM WOODYARD and DOUGLASS CONNER, is admitted to record.

Teste, P. D. DAWE

Major case suggesting how domestic violence ought to be taken into account in children's cases: http://ht.ly/4qT7q "Violence is violence."

Prince William County Genealogical Society

The Prince William County Genealogical Society will host a presentation by Kent Sovine, president of Virginia Lawn Services, on "Cemetery Maintenance" on April 12, 2011 at 10:30 a.m. in the Community Room of Chinn Park Library.

FAMILY JUSTICE?

The Family Justice Review published an interim report today. It’s 232 pages long and responses are required to the consultation questionnaire by 23rd June.

Buried deep in the report is the recognition that grandparents can have an important role to play in a child’s life and that, so far as practicable, a child should continue to have a relationship with them regardless of parental separation. There is also recognition that there should be a presumption in favour of shared parenting.

The report does not, as some journalists were initially suggesting, change the law and if anything recognises that family dynamics are inevitably complex especially following relationship breakdown, meaning that a one size fits all approach is never appropriate. Needless to say it is already being criticised by some fathers’ groups for failing to go far enough (sharing the responsibility of parenting isn’t the same as equalising time between parents) and sadly for grandparents it suggests that there will be a continuing need for them to seek leave of the court before making an application; so there are no deemed presumptions or recommended procedural changes there either. The trouble is the rhetoric always sounds fine; dealing with the reality, as any family justice professional will vouch, is a different matter.