Ex Parte for holiday visitation denial/clarification?

[ProSeDadinMD]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Guess

The Ex has flatly stated, twice via email, that she is not going to allow me to have the visitation allotted to me over the "Christmas/Winter Break" as allowed in our order, and is also stating that we did not split the break last year, although we did.

The order states that after the exchange at noon on Christmas Day(she had from 7pm Christmas Eve thru noon on Christmas Day last year, and I should have that this year), “The child shall then return to the opposite party for ½ of the remaining overnights of the Christmas /Winter break; the opposite party shall then have the remaining Christmas/Winter break;”. Last year I had the period right after Christmas and she had the second half. This year should be reversed. I am sure that The Ex is now interpreting the 2 mentions of "the opposite party" as being the same person. She is also stating that we alternate this the same as we do Spring Break, although the order plainly states that for Spring Break we are "to alternate each year: the plaintiff shall have odd years,".

Is it possible to have an Ex Parte or emergency hearing based on her stated(in writing) intention to not allow the holiday visitation, and to clarify this?

 

[Ohiogal]

NOpe. You should clarify it but it is NOT an emergency because you dont' know for sure that she will deny you. Go pick up your child and file a police report if she doesn't give you Lilmissprose.

 

[wileybunch]

When you think of all a family court has to handle including cases of abuse closed-door type hearings, it's easier to keep in perspective what types of cases should jump the line and be heard right away. Couples squabbling or threatening to cause issues in visitation are not emergencies even though they could really wreck plans someone has. If she was threatening withholding because she'd been tying child up and abusing her, that would be a different matter. You just have to remind her of the language that's in there and whatever your strongest case is for your interpretation and then let her choose what she's going to do, you can't stop her. If you end up filing for contempt and she loses, you'll get the time back just not this particular time.

 

[LdiJ]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Guess

The Ex has flatly stated, twice via email, that she is not going to allow me to have the visitation allotted to me over the "Christmas/Winter Break" as allowed in our order, and is also stating that we did not split the break last year, although we did.

The order states that after the exchange at noon on Christmas Day(she had from 7pm Christmas Eve thru noon on Christmas Day last year, and I should have that this year), “The child shall then return to the opposite party for ½ of the remaining overnights of the Christmas /Winter break; the opposite party shall then have the remaining Christmas/Winter break;”. Last year I had the period right after Christmas and she had the second half. This year should be reversed. I am sure that The Ex is now interpreting the 2 mentions of "the opposite party" as being the same person. She is also stating that we alternate this the same as we do Spring Break, although the order plainly states that for Spring Break we are "to alternate each year: the plaintiff shall have odd years,".

Is it possible to have an Ex Parte or emergency hearing based on her stated(in writing) intention to not allow the holiday visitation, and to clarify this?

I agree with the others, but you really do need to get the language clarified. That is very poorly written and therefore subject to misinterpretation.

 

[ProSeDadinMD]

I figured as much, but had to ask.

I'll just be adding it to my Motion to Modify Visitation Transportation

 

[truebluemd]

NOpe. You should clarify it but it is NOT an emergency because you dont' know for sure that she will deny you. Go pick up your child and file a police report if she doesn't give you Lilmissprose.

I agree.


Jeez. What is your ex's problem?

 

[truebluemd]

I agree with the others, but you really do need to get the language clarified. That is very poorly written and therefore subject to misinterpretation.

I think the language is pretty clear with the exception of what time the child gets exchanged on the half way mark.

How is your child dealing with all of this drama from mom?

 

[Silverplum]

I agree.

I do, too, in general.
But you make dang sure you get ALL of Christmas next year as your "makeup time," and make dang sure your Judge knows about this stunt.

Jeez. What is your ex's problem?

Hardcore beyotch with ownership issues.
I know one of those, too.

 

[ProSeDadinMD]

Jeez. What is your ex's problem?

How much time do you have?

I think the language is pretty clear with the exception of what time the child gets exchanged on the half way mark.

How is your child dealing with all of this drama from mom?

The language was clear enough last year.

And LMPS isn't really aware as far as I can tell, except to ask me last Friday why was The Ex "mad at you?". But that's a whole nother "sick/not sick/contagious/keep Dad in the dark" scenario.

I do, too, in general.
But you make dang sure you get ALL of Christmas next year as your "makeup time," and make dang sure your Judge knows about this stunt.

Hardcore beyotch with ownership issues.
I know one of those, too.

Actuall, if she does what I think she is planning, which is go to New Mexico after Christmas to see her mom, and doesn’t have her back to me would be guilty of this:

§ 9-305. Prohibited acts - Outside of this State.

(a) In general.- If a child is under the age of 16 years, a relative who knows that another person is the lawful custodian of the child may not:

(1) abduct, take, or carry away the child from the lawful custodian to a place in another state;

(2) having acquired lawful possession of the child, detain the child in another state for more than 48 hours after the lawful custodian demands that the child be returned;

And could be thusly charged:

§ 9-307. Penalties.

(a) Violation of § 9-304.- A person who violates any provision of § 9-304 of this subtitle is guilty of a misdemeanor and on conviction is subject to a fine not exceeding $250 or imprisonment not exceeding 30 days.

(b) Violation of § 9-305(a) - Not more than 30 days.- If the child is out of the custody of the lawful custodian for not more than 30 days, a person who violates any provision of § 9-305(a) of this subtitle is guilty of a felony and on conviction is subject to a fine not exceeding $250 or imprisonment not exceeding 30 days, or both.

§ 9-304 is "in state".

I doubt that'd go over real well with her Federal job with the DC courts, huh?

 

[Silverplum]

Actuall, if she does what I think she is planning, which is go to New Mexico after Christmas to see her mom, and doesn’t have her back to me would be guilty of this:


And could be thusly charged:

§ 9-304 is "in state".

I doubt that'd go over real well with her Federal job with the DC courts, huh?

*Purrs with pleasure!*

 

[truebluemd]

How much time do you have?

The language was clear enough last year.

And LMPS isn't really aware as far as I can tell, except to ask me last Friday why was The Ex "mad at you?". But that's a whole nother "sick/not sick/contagious/keep Dad in the dark" scenario.

Actuall, if she does what I think she is planning, which is go to New Mexico after Christmas to see her mom, and doesn’t have her back to me would be guilty of this:


And could be thusly charged:

§ 9-304 is "in state".

I doubt that'd go over real well with her Federal job with the DC courts, huh?

I think she is just being difficult to cause you stress. Same thing my ex does when its getting close to "that time" Just wait it out. Even if she violates those statutes, she will go down in contempt first for denial of visitation.

Wow, can you imagine the amount of contempt and show cause motions that will be filed after the holidays for all the nincompoops who are denying the other parent their court ordered holiday time. Its like the "after holiday rush"

 

[LdiJ]

How much time do you have?

The language was clear enough last year.

And LMPS isn't really aware as far as I can tell, except to ask me last Friday why was The Ex "mad at you?". But that's a whole nother "sick/not sick/contagious/keep Dad in the dark" scenario.

Actuall, if she does what I think she is planning, which is go to New Mexico after Christmas to see her mom, and doesn’t have her back to me would be guilty of this:


And could be thusly charged:

§ 9-304 is "in state".

I doubt that'd go over real well with her Federal job with the DC courts, huh?

I think that the use of the word "relative" may mean that the statute is not applicable to parents with custody. After all, she does have lawful custody, she is simply going to be in contempt of court for violating the court order.

 

[ProSeDadinMD]

Ld, I guess we'll just see how that is interpreted by a criminal judge then, because since we actually SHARE physical custody, I would be a/the(at that time per the order) "lawful custodian of the child", and I'd think that MOM would qualify as a relative.

a relative who knows that another person is the lawful custodian of the child

 

[LdiJ]

Ld, I guess we'll just see how that is interpreted by a criminal judge then, because since we actually SHARE physical custody, I would be a/the(at that time per the order) "lawful custodian of the child", and I'd think that MOM would qualify as a relative.

You could be right, however I would think that if the law applied to parents, that it would not have said simply "relative", but would have said "relative or parent". I would certainly touch base with an attorney (not hire one or even necessarily pay for one) but I would touch base with one.

You also need to remember that you would need to have a DA willing to prosecute it as a crime in order for it to get in front of a criminal judge. I agree that mom is a beyotch..that goes without saying. However, anybody here will tell you that its rare to get a DA to prosecute criminally on anything that has to do with family law. (other than abuse or neglect, of course).

You may even have a hard time getting a judge to find mom in contempt on this one, because the wording is honestly poor. I do however think that you will need to file for both contempt, and clarification.

 

[profmum]

How much time do you have?

The language was clear enough last year.

And LMPS isn't really aware as far as I can tell, except to ask me last Friday why was The Ex "mad at you?". But that's a whole nother "sick/not sick/contagious/keep Dad in the dark" scenario.

Actuall, if she does what I think she is planning, which is go to New Mexico after Christmas to see her mom, and doesn’t have her back to me would be guilty of this:


And could be thusly charged:

§ 9-304 is "in state".

I doubt that'd go over real well with her Federal job with the DC courts, huh?

Frankly the order can be interpreted as the opposite party being the same in both instances. So it is not clear. Having said that, you will not get an ex parte hearing for vacation time. My ex tried the exact same thing last year for his misinterpretation of the vacation time and the hearing was not granted. Second, you will not be able to prosecute the ex for any criminal act if she takes the child to NM, provided that she is allowed to travel with the child out of state, if not, then you are still looking at contempt.
Finally, unless it is said and done, you cannot file for contempt or for an ex parte hearing if you think Mum is going to do something. BUT given how unclear your CO is, I really think your best is getting it clarified, which will not be considered an emergency.

So I think you need to adapt your Xmas plans this year and have the vacation issue clarified.

You really appear trigger happy when it comes to filing motions.. dangerous ground to be on..