COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA
Present: Judges Bray, Annunziata and Overton
RICK MORIN
MEMORANDUM OPINION *
v. Record No. 0170-97-3 PER CURIAM
JULY 29, 1997
TRACEY MORIN
FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF WASHINGTON COUNTY
Charles H. Smith, Jr., Judge
(Margaret T. Schenck; Southwest Virginia
Legal Aid Society, Inc., on briefs), for
appellant.
(Sage B. Johnson; Johnson, Scyphers & Austin,
on brief), for appellee.
Rick Morin (father) appeals the decision of the circuit
court ordering that custody of the parties' three children shall
remain with Tracey Morin (mother). Father contends that the
trial court (1) erred by finding that there had not been a
sufficient change in circumstances; (2) erred by finding that it
was in the children's best interests to return to mother; and (3)
abused its discretion by failing to address the youngest child's
special needs. Upon reviewing the record and briefs of the
parties, we conclude that this appeal is without merit.
Accordingly, we summarily affirm the decision of the trial court.
Rule 5A:27.
Mother contends that father did not object to the trial
*
Pursuant to Code § 17-116.010 this opinion is not
designated for publication.
court's decision and failed to raise before the trial court the
arguments set forth in his appeal. Therefore, mother argues,
father has failed to preserve these issues for appeal. Rule
5A:18.
Rule 5A:18 states that "no ruling of the
trial court . . . will be considered as a
basis for reversal unless the objection was
stated together with the grounds therefor at
the time of the ruling, except for good cause
shown or to enable the Court of Appeals to
attain the ends of justice." The purpose of
Rule 5A:18 is to "afford[] 'the trial court
an opportunity to rule intelligently on the
issues presented, thus avoiding unnecessary
appeals and reversals.'"
Newsome v. Newsome, 18 Va. App. 22, 24, 441 S.E.2d 346, 347
(1994) (citation omitted). After examining the record, including
the written statement of facts, we conclude that mother is
correct.
The order from which father appeals was endorsed by counsel
as "seen." The record contains no motion for reconsideration or
proposed order setting out father's objections. The written
statement of facts submitted by father and accepted by the trial
court contains no record of any objections by father. See Lee v.
Lee, 12 Va. App. 512, 404 S.E.2d 736 (1991) (en banc). We have
examined the record and the issues raised and find that neither
good cause nor the ends of justice require our consideration of
those issues on appeal.
Accordingly, the decision of the circuit court is summarily
affirmed.
2
Affirmed.
3