Unacompanied minor

[jslopez711]

You mentioned ROFR as if it was part of your order. 5 people read your post that way.

Response #10 mentions the fact that " I JUST FOUND OUT". Or did you not read?

 

[Bloopy]

No, you are wrong OG. All the time aloted to my family, with the exception of grand parents, if the court has granted them specific time, must be done during the time my child has with me.

Again, this is your opinion (and a wrong one at that), unless you have code or case law to prove other wise.

Read post 10 fine. Yet you snapped at OhioGal as if it were her fault you mentioned ROFR. Even in Texas it COULD HAVE been written in your decree.

But seriously, the best reason for me to back off is that OhioGal can fight her own battles.

Goodnight Sunshine

 

[jslopez711]

Read post 10 fine. Yet you snapped at OhioGal as if it were her fault you mentioned ROFR. Even in Texas it COULD HAVE been written in your decree.

But seriously, the best reason for me to back off is that OhioGal can fight her own battles.

Goodnight Sunshine

No you did not read post 10, if you had, you would have noticed that I said that I had just found out.

I know OG better than you know your sock drawer pal.

Enjoy your stay troll.

 

[Ohiogal]

No, you are wrong OG

No. Based on what you stated, I am correct.

All the time aloted to my family, with the exception of grand parents, if the court has granted them specific time, must be done during the time my child has with me.

Understood and what I said.

TX SOP does not stipulate any travel unless it is specifically mentioned. As I said SOP.

Okay. That sounds like doubletalk.

ROFR in Texas is only applicable to property (real estate). I just found out.

Then the question is why did you bring up ROFR in this post about custody. Because ROFR is a custody term that some people in every state have in their custody orders. If you don't have it, then junior can travel on your time to see your family. If you do have a ROFR then you have to abide by it.

Again, this is your opinion (and a wrong one at that), unless you have code or case law to prove other wise.

No. This was based on the fact that you stated you had a ROFR relating to custody and someone asked how that works when extended family is supposed to see the child on the parent's time as well. I was explaining. And how I explained was correct given the facts at the time. Come on JS, you know I cannot read minds. YOU stated you had a ROFR. That limits things. If you don't have a ROFR then that is a different ballgame and anything pertaining to ROFR with custody doesn't apply since you don't have one.


I have my answer already, thanks for everything. This is how it plays out;

The boy can travel and see any person I designate him to see for any length of time I designate adult supervision. Texas is big on keeping families together, this I know. I also know that I'm acting in the best interest of my child, and that is firm. Sending your kid to visit an aunt across the street for a few days is no different than to send him on an airplane for a few days. Mode of travel, distance or time have no case unless the pettitioner can prove its habitual.

And no one would have argued that if you had not stated that you had a right of first refusal in your parenting plan. YOU mentioned that. YOU are the one who stated that you had it. Which is why I asked for the actual wording. Damn. if you don't know what your parenting plan states, how the heck am I supposed to know? I answered the question based on the information you gave -- which was that you had a ROFR.

I really need stronger meds now and this damn sinus infection needs to kick off.

 

[Ohiogal]

What part of "I JUST FOUND OUT" did you not understand newby?




I've known OG for far longer than you have kid, sit down, shut up and READ post carefuly.

You are dismissed!

JSlopez, yeah you have. And I respect your replies normally HOWEVER you are criticizing me for responding to your question when there is a ROFR mentioned by you in the first post. The wording of your ROFR matters but then after I respond you criticize my response because you do not have an ROFR. Yes ROFR can be applied to real estate transactions. It is also however included in MANY custody arrangements -- even with those people who have a standard parenting plan for time allotment it can be added. When you change the info AFTER I have responded and then tell me to back up what I am saying when it relates to the apparent NON EXISTENT ROFR that is out of line. You just found out -- well great. But that would have changed the info I GAVE YOU. I respond to what you provide. I can't give you accurate information if what you provide is not accurate. So to criticize me for answering correctly based on the INCORRECT information I was provided is out of line and unfair. Back to my corner now.

 

[stealth2]

What is the name of your state? TX

I have an 8 year old son that I want to send over to my sister's house for a long weekend during his time with me. He would travel unacompanied from point to point in an airplane and of course my sister would meet him at the gate. No problems there.

I've read my orders (SOP TX) and the right of first refusal but it's still unclear to me if I can send him for a long weekend without his mother doing anything. She doesn't approve of the travel but I don't care.

Anyone have any experience on this issue?

So it took you over 24 hours to process that the right of first refusal stuff you read dealt with real estate and not your kid? Pretty scary.

 

[Ohiogal]

No you did not read post 10, if you had, you would have noticed that I said that I had just found out.

I know OG better than you know your sock drawer pal.

Enjoy your stay troll.

WHOA! Bloopy is NOT a troll. Bloopy was defending me but that does not make Bloopy a troll.
Lets make this easy -- if there is NO ROFR related to custody in your papers then junior can go whereever you want junior to go on your time (as long as it is not illegal). Okay?And the other parent has no say.

 

[Ohiogal]

So it took you over 24 hours to process that the right of first refusal stuff you read dealt with real estate and not your kid? Pretty scary.

I am still confused by that. But I figured it was the stupid meds I am taking> What do I know? I figured the way that was worded the ROFR dealt with custody.

 

[profmum]

So it took you over 24 hours to process that the right of first refusal stuff you read dealt with real estate and not your kid? Pretty scary.

downright scary!!!

 

[jslopez711]

So it took you over 24 hours to process that the right of first refusal stuff you read dealt with real estate and not your kid? Pretty scary.

Yeah, you would have figured that once they mentioned property and estate would have been a big clue right?

What happened is that I read my CO, I read it again, and again, no ROFR mentioned. Then I got to thinking if any of the boiler plate paragraphs somehow pointed to ROFR. Well, I could not find that either. So I reviewed ROFR and it did not apply ( what a surprise since the only ROFR that has legislature attached, and the only that is listed in TX Law, is the one that applies to property. --And that is what took 24 hours to understand.

None the less I gave this board a try and it still yielded good advice....in a previous post doing a search.

OG Thanks for everything, double up your meds and we can talk again. Stealth, you stay Stealthy, I just got back from NJ by the way.

Thanks guys.

 

[fairisfair]

Yeah, you would have figured that once they mentioned property and estate would have been a big clue right?

What happened is that I read my CO, I read it again, and again, no ROFR mentioned. Then I got to thinking if any of the boiler plate paragraphs somehow pointed to ROFR. Well, I could not find that either. So I reviewed ROFR and it did not apply ( what a surprise since the only ROFR that has legislature attached, and the only that is listed in TX Law, is the one that applies to property. --And that is what took 24 hours to understand.

None the less I gave this board a try and it still yielded good advice....in a previous post doing a search.

OG Thanks for everything, double up your meds and we can talk again. Stealth, you stay Stealthy, I just got back from NJ by the way.

Thanks guys.

That is because the right of first refusal when it comes to child custody is NOT generally a state statute, but is written in accordance with prevailing legal practices..

It is able to be written into custody agreements, including TEXAS; and when it is, it must be followed in accordance with how it is written.

It is ESPECIALLY because you have been around long enough to know better, that the snarky attitude you took with OG and the other seniors is reprehensible.

 

[stealth2]

Yeah, you would have figured that once they mentioned property and estate would have been a big clue right?

What happened is that I read my CO, I read it again, and again, no ROFR mentioned. Then I got to thinking if any of the boiler plate paragraphs somehow pointed to ROFR. Well, I could not find that either. So I reviewed ROFR and it did not apply ( what a surprise since the only ROFR that has legislature attached, and the only that is listed in TX Law, is the one that applies to property. --And that is what took 24 hours to understand.

Uh huh, if you say so, Josie.

Stealth, you stay Stealthy, I just got back from NJ by the way.

Thanks guys.

I wondered what that stench was... You'll be glad to know it's dissipated. Take a shower BEFORE you visit us again, eh?

 

[jslopez711]

I wondered what that stench was... You'll be glad to know it's dissipated. Take a shower BEFORE you visit us again, eh?

I did bathe, but it was 4 months prior to my visit. I figured I would just blend in with NJ's environment but I guess I got found out.

 

[jslopez711]

That is because the right of first refusal when it comes to child custody is NOT generally a state statute, but is written in accordance with prevailing legal practices..

It is able to be written into custody agreements, including TEXAS; and when it is, it must be followed in accordance with how it is written.

It is ESPECIALLY because you have been around long enough to know better, that the snarky attitude you took with OG and the other seniors is reprehensible.

Like I said, I figured it out, Thanks all the same.

 

[profmum]

That is because the right of first refusal when it comes to child custody is NOT generally a state statute, but is written in accordance with prevailing legal practices..

It is able to be written into custody agreements, including TEXAS; and when it is, it must be followed in accordance with how it is written.



There are a number of different ways in which ROFR can be written.. and it is not generally a state statute and may not even by ordered by the Courts if one party wishes it. It is a very grey area that needs to be either agreed upon with very clear details on how it gets exercised (how much time, -2,6,8 hrs or overnight, window for notification and response from the other parent etc etc) or ordered by the Courts. I am dealing with the same issue of getting similar language and the devil is in the details.. completely..so if you dont have ROFR in your CO.. then it does not apply.. you can do what you want with your son on your parenting time.