Brother in law took kids

[jeffadams]

Then she didn't file orders. She filed motions for orders. In other words she asked the court for such. Her and dad still have equal rights. She can go to auntie's house and pick up the children if she wants. The police still will not help however.

Ok, she filed motions. The court just awarded her custody and restraining order. The sherriff is serving BIL this afternoon.

I don't know all the legal jargon, I just assumed anyone reading could deduce what I was trying to find out by the context of my questions.

I suspect he is blowing smoke about having tempory custody. If my sister files for custody, will that reveal whether or not he has actually filed?

Should this have been worded "filed a motion"?

So my question is; does a sherriff, or other legal official, have to present my sister with a temporary custody order? He claims he has papers but he is most certainly lying.

This should be a simple yes or no but there again, I don't know the jargon.

I understand fully if he doesn't have the order she can go get the kids. It seems like everyone answers revolve around questions I haven't even asked.
Like this one.

There is no "consensus" in family laws. The law is the law is the law. Simple as that. Dad has as much right to his children as does Mom.

I at no time asked if he could take the children or not. I asked if he could claim he had custody w/o serving her first. Refer to my first post.

And obvious answers that render my questions pointless like this one.

Well , does she have the orders in hand ?

Would I be asking these questions if she had the custody orders?

Has anyone even tried to comprehend anything I wrote in any of my posts? I get the idea that the people here are more interested in impressing everyone with their knowledge of legalese than helping newbs with legal advice.

At least I can walk away knowing the difference between filing an order and filing a motion for an order, jeez.....

 

[Silverplum]

Well, then, since you're so unhappy with the volunteers here...have a pleasant day and goodbye.

Ok, she filed motions. The court just awarded her custody and restraining order. The sherriff is serving BIL this afternoon.

I don't know all the legal jargon, I just assumed anyone reading could deduce what I was trying to find out by the context of my questions.


Should this have been worded "filed a motion"?

This should be a simple yes or no but there again, I don't know the jargon.

I understand fully if he doesn't have the order she can go get the kids. It seems like everyone answers revolve around questions I haven't even asked.
Like this one.

I at no time asked if he could take the children or not. I asked if he could claim he had custody w/o serving her first. Refer to my first post.

And obvious answers that render my questions pointless like this one.

Would I be asking these questions if she had the custody orders?

Has anyone even tried to comprehend anything I wrote in any of my posts? I get the idea that the people here are more interested in impressing everyone with their knowledge of legalese than helping newbs with legal advice.

At least I can walk away knowing the difference between filing an order and filing a motion for an order, jeez.....

 

[SopranoKris]

Jeff,

First of all, this is a legal forum and they are trying to give you a LEGAL answer to your questions. Without all the details, it's difficult to give an accurate answer, which is why you've been asked so many questions. Second, you are a third party to this situation. Normally, they don't answer 3rd party questions, because, you guessed it, often the 3rd party doesn't have the complete story or know all the details to answer the questions.

It's a tough situation what your sister is going through right now. I can understand why you have a short fuse at the moment. Take a step back, take a deep breath, and realize that the people here on the boards ARE trying to help, but they need to know the details to give you the most accurate answers. We can only answer based on what you tell us.

You may think some of the questions sound harsh, but they're not. So please answer without attitude and you'll definitely get some good advice. OK?

 

[BL]

Ok, she filed motions. The court just awarded her custody and restraining order. The sherriff is serving BIL this afternoon.

I don't know all the legal jargon, I just assumed anyone reading could deduce what I was trying to find out by the context of my questions.


Should this have been worded "filed a motion"?

This should be a simple yes or no but there again, I don't know the jargon.

I understand fully if he doesn't have the order she can go get the kids. It seems like everyone answers revolve around questions I haven't even asked.
Like this one.

I at no time asked if he could take the children or not. I asked if he could claim he had custody w/o serving her first. Refer to my first post.

And obvious answers that render my questions pointless like this one.

Would I be asking these questions if she had the custody orders?

Has anyone even tried to comprehend anything I wrote in any of my posts? I get the idea that the people here are more interested in impressing everyone with their knowledge of legalese than helping newbs with legal advice.

At least I can walk away knowing the difference between filing an order and filing a motion for an order, jeez.....

Jeez ?

You were given correct advice.

How and the heck do we know if he had/has order ?

Now you go figure out how to retrieve the child(Ren) .

You ask for advice , want to prove us wrong .

If you're here to disapprove us , you are wrong .

Oh , and just a hint :

The sherriff is serving BIL this afternoon

The one that petitioned should be there with them to pickup, if this was an emercey order .

TY .

 

[jeffadams]

Sopranokris, thank you for your intelligent and lucid reply. You are correct, I am a bit touchy right now.

BL

How and the heck do we know if he had/has order ?

I haven't edited any of my posts. I defy you to find this question in any of them. Go back, read slower. Perhaps your reading comprehension will improve

Now you go figure out how to retrieve the child(Ren) .

Thanks for the malicious remark. <<<< Sarcasm I'm sure will go right over your head.

You ask for advice , want to prove us wrong .

I haven't disputed the accuracy of anyones advice, I keep hearing the same thing repeated.>>>>

Dad has as much right to his children as does Mom.

Which is a question I never asked in the first place.

If you're here to disapprove us , you are wrong .

Feel free to post any remarks I made where I disagreed with someone about fact of law. <<< Did I get the jargon right?

Oh , and just a hint :


Quote:
The sherriff is serving BIL this afternoon

The one that petitioned should be there with them to pickup, if this was an emercey order .

Thank you, that is a good piece of advice. She left as soon as she found out the orders were court approved. But, as I mentioned in a previous post, we don't know where the kids are.

Silverplum: Well, then, since you're so unhappy with the volunteers here...have a pleasant day and goodbye.

Why thank you for your valuable input.

There is no "consensus" in family laws. The law is the law is the law. Simple as that. Dad has as much right to his children as does Mom.

I didn't bend your arm and force you to give me, while correct, unnecessary advise. I guess you get what you pay for, huh?

 

[Isis1]

Sopranokris, thank you for your intelligent and lucid reply. You are correct, I am a bit touchy right now.

BL

I haven't edited any of my posts. I defy you to find this question in any of them. Go back, read slower. Perhaps your reading comprehension will improve

Thanks for the malicious remark. <<<< Sarcasm I'm sure will go right over your head.

I haven't disputed the accuracy of anyones advice, I keep hearing the same thing repeated.>>>> Which is a question I never asked in the first place.

Feel free to post any remarks I made where I disagreed with someone about fact of law. <<< Did I get the jargon right?

Thank you, that is a good piece of advice. She left as soon as she found out the orders were court approved. But, as I mentioned in a previous post, we don't know where the kids are.


Why thank you for your valuable input. I didn't bend your arm and force you to give me, while correct, unnecessary advise. I guess you get what you pay for, huh?

dude, do you want help? or do you just plan on being defensive because you don't understand??? please don't argue like my ten year old does when he can't understand the homework over the first explaination.

mom may have filed orders, or she may have filed motions. the question is, did she go before a judge and get a signature? or did the clerk just set a hearing date and conform the copies. there is a huge difference. the sherrif may not serve them today, she may have requested them to do the service. the police will not get involved as this is a civil matter. they don't get involved. personally, from your description, i'd wait until the kids are picked up for visitation before i had him served. this way, dad doesn't do anything stupid while he has the kids. did mom even check if anything was filed against her? or was that determined to be a bluff?

 

[Nativity]

Jeff you were told before your attitude here isn't going to get anywhere that's is why I am assuming that not so many are answering your questions.

It's a free site, you do get what you pay for but you can get more if you are more polite with the VOLUNTEERS who don't get paid by helping you, if you piss them off you will loose out on the best site you will find that can help you, without paying.

 

[jeffadams]

dude, do you want help? or do you just plan on being defensive because you don't understand??? please don't argue like my ten year old does when he can't understand the homework over the first explaination.

"Dude", I just don't suffer fools very well, even when I'm in a good mood. I'm cool with a question being answered with a question if it's relevant to the conversation. So, I'll go over this one more time if your so inclined. If not, that's cool "dude"

mom may have filed orders, or she may have filed motions. the question is, did she go before a judge and get a signature?

Yes

or did the clerk just set a hearing date and conform the copies.

No, she has the papers in her hand, Temp custody and restraining order. .

the sherrif may not serve them today, she may have requested them to do the service. the police will not get involved as this is a civil matter. they don't get involved.

Yes, she went over there but couldn't find the kids. So she went to the police dept and they gave her some kind of runaround. She is too tired and upset to give me any rational explanation right now so I don't know all the details.

personally, from your description, i'd wait until the kids are picked up for visitation before i had him served. this way, dad doesn't do anything stupid while he has the kids.

Great idea, I hope it works out that way.

did mom even check if anything was filed against her? or was that determined to be a bluff?

Yes he was bluffing just as I thought.

 

[CJane]

Once the father is served with the temporary restraining order, custody of the children will revert to Mom (in MO, it's very common for custody to be determined ex parte when an RO is involved).

HOWEVER, there WILL be a hearing on the matter of the RO and therefore custody... within a couple of weeks at the most, I'd imagine. Mom NEEDS to appear at this hearing and she needs to be able to rationally explain why she fears for the safety of herself and her children. If she's successful, she'll be granted an RO for not more than 1 year.

She needs to file for divorce and custody and let the process work.

 

[jeffadams]

Jeff you were told before your attitude here isn't going to get anywhere that's is why I am assuming that not so many are answering your questions.

It's a free site, you do get what you pay for but you can get more if you are more polite with the VOLUNTEERS who don't get paid by helping you, if you piss them off you will loose out on the best site you will find that can help you, without paying.

You make a good point; but in all fairness, no one was answering before either.

 

[jeffadams]

CJane:

Once the father is served with the temporary restraining order, custody of the children will revert to Mom (in MO, it's very common for custody to be determined ex parte when an RO is involved).

HOWEVER, there WILL be a hearing on the matter of the RO and therefore custody... within a couple of weeks at the most, I'd imagine. Mom NEEDS to appear at this hearing and she needs to be able to rationally explain why she fears for the safety of herself and her children. If she's successful, she'll be granted an RO for not more than 1 year.

She needs to file for divorce and custody and let the process work.

From your lips to Gods ears.

I intend to print this post, Thank you very much. My sis is dealing with a lot of abuse issues at the hands of this guy. Too bad you can't go to the courthouse and buy a permit for a good hard a** beating. I'd show up early to be the first in line.

 

[CJane]

CJane:

From your lips to Gods ears.

I intend to print this post, Thank you very much. My sis is dealing with a lot of abuse issues at the hands of this guy. Too bad you can't go to the courthouse and buy a permit for a good hard a** beating. I'd show up early to be the first in line.

What county are these motions filed in? I've been involved in RO hearings in two counties in MO with vastly varying takes on the issue. One judge (male) indicated that he 'almost always' grants the 12 month RO (in MO, that's all the longer they can last) 'just in case' the story is true. The other (female) required rather compelling evidence that the person requesting the RO had reason to fear the other party, and any behavior on the part of the 'victim' that was seen as instigating reduced their credibility immensely.

 

[jeffadams]

What county are these motions filed in?

Howell

I've been involved in RO hearings in two counties in MO with vastly varying takes on the issue. One judge (male) indicated that he 'almost always' grants the 12 month RO (in MO, that's all the longer they can last) 'just in case' the story is true. The other (female) required rather compelling evidence that the person requesting the RO had reason to fear the other party, and any behavior on the part of the 'victim' that was seen as instigating reduced their credibility immensely.

I just hope after all this is over she doesn't do something stupid, like going back to him. He has an uncanny ability to make her believe anything he says or threat he makes.

Right now the court order still hasn't been faxed to the sherriff's office, so the window to catch him at work is quickly closing. If he can't be caught at work, he will be very hard to find. He has several places he can stay and effectively hide out. He has also farmed out the kids, he says to Springfield at his aunt's house. But as I said before he lies even if the truth will suffice.

 

[jeffadams]

One other thing. Why didn't the court send the court orders with my sister when she went to the sherriff's office? They sent the protection orders with her and the sherriff said, "well why don't you just go get the kids?" Would that be a violation of the ex parte if she went to get the kids without a sherriff?

Thanks again for your time CJane.

 

[CJane]

Howell

I just hope after all this is over she doesn't do something stupid, like going back to him. He has an uncanny ability to make her believe anything he says or threat he makes.

Right now the court order still hasn't been faxed to the sherriff's office, so the window to catch him at work is quickly closing. If he can't be caught at work, he will be very hard to find. He has several places he can stay and effectively hide out. He has also farmed out the kids, he says to Springfield at his aunt's house. But as I said before he lies even if the truth will suffice.

Oh geez. When my craziest Ex filed an RO against me, it was faxed to my local PD/Sheriff's office w/in an hour and served on me that evening when I got home from work.

Don't they have a visitation set up for the weekend? If that still stands, Mom needs to call the sheriff and set up for a deputy to be present at the exchange - one, as a witness and two, to serve Dad. Easy peasy.