NM: Can a stipulated custody order be challenged?

[not2cleverRed]

Thank you for your replies. The basis of the argument would be that despite both parents agreeing, the court should not have signed the order as it is not in the best interest of the child (the reason why one of the parents signed was under duress, having no other option to see their child and because the other party made false criminal claims to intimidate the parent into signing). Thank you

And why is it "not in the best interest of the child"?

If it's a minor inconvenience, the parent just has to suck it up for now and make the best of things.

If the child is actually being endangered, that's different.

Either way, I hope the child has a therapist.

 

[Ohiogal]

Thank you for your replies. The basis of the argument would be that despite both parents agreeing, the court should not have signed the order as it is not in the best interest of the child (the reason why one of the parents signed was under duress, having no other option to see their child and because the other party made false criminal claims to intimidate the parent into signing). Thank you

That is NOT duress.

 

[t74]

OG, I believe that the filing of false criminal complaints and the threats of denying visitation/custodial time can be considered "duress" by a person without knowledge of the legal system to represent him/herself and little financial resources to hire legal help. The court system is very intimidating to someone not a part of it.

 

[Zigner]

OG, I believe that the filing of false criminal complaints and the threats of denying visitation/custodial time can be considered "duress" by a person without knowledge of the legal system to represent him/herself and little financial resources to hire legal help. The court system is very intimidating to someone not a part of it.

Isn't that cute - explaining to the family law attorney what "duress" is. That is not duress, as it is legally defined.

 

[not2cleverRed]

OG, I believe that the filing of false criminal complaints and the threats of denying visitation/custodial time can be considered "duress" by a person without knowledge of the legal system to represent him/herself and little financial resources to hire legal help. The court system is very intimidating to someone not a part of it.

That it is not the legal definition further illustrates my point: competent legal representation is necessary if you cannot use words with legal definitions correctly.

OP would get a little more benefit of the doubt if they displayed the capacity and willingness to learn.

 

[Ohiogal]

OG, I believe that the filing of false criminal complaints and the threats of denying visitation/custodial time can be considered "duress" by a person without knowledge of the legal system to represent him/herself and little financial resources to hire legal help. The court system is very intimidating to someone not a part of it.

Hence why some of us are specially trained to deal with the court system.

 

[t74]

Hence why some of us are specially trained to deal with the court system.

I simply asked for some understanding. Sometimes posters to this forum forget how fragile people involved in custody disputes are. I felt OG was unusually dismissive to OP who obviously needs some hand holding as well as a kick in the tush. This is especially true in "family" matters like family and probate law. I am sorry she took it otherwise.

I certainly encourage individuals in contentious situations to involve an attorney Unfortunately, even having a valid case does not mean that the person can afford the services of an attorney. In my own experience in the last year, the opposing party simply being unresponsive to a legal requirement (in one case filing a will for probate or just providing the known beneficiaries with a copy of the will and estate inventory and accounting despite repeated friendly requests) can drive the legal costs beyond reason; being legally correct does not mean that one will get an enforceable order if one cannot afford to pay even reimbursable legal costs up front.

At this time with many proceedings being delayed, child related issues are sadly suffering far more than in the past. Children as well as parents are suffering from the additional stresses. Please consider the unusual situation we are in when replying as your location or financial condition may be faring better than the poster's.

 

[Zigner]

I simply asked for some understanding. Sometimes posters to this forum forget how fragile people involved in custody disputes are. I felt OG was unusually dismissive to OP who obviously needs some hand holding as well as a kick in the tush. This is especially true in "family" matters like family and probate law. I am sorry she took it otherwise.

I certainly encourage individuals in contentious situations to involve an attorney Unfortunately, even having a valid case does not mean that the person can afford the services of an attorney. In my own experience in the last year, the opposing party simply being unresponsive to a legal requirement (in one case filing a will for probate or just providing the known beneficiaries with a copy of the will and estate inventory and accounting despite repeated friendly requests) can drive the legal costs beyond reason; being legally correct does not mean that one will get an enforceable order if one cannot afford to pay even reimbursable legal costs up front.

At this time with many proceedings being delayed, child related issues are sadly suffering far more than in the past. Children as well as parents are suffering from the additional stresses. Please consider the unusual situation we are in when replying as your location or financial condition may be faring better than the poster's.

How does any of this change the legal definition of duress?

 

[not2cleverRed]

I simply asked for some understanding. Sometimes posters to this forum forget how fragile people involved in custody disputes are. I felt OG was unusually dismissive to OP who obviously needs some hand holding as well as a kick in the tush. This is especially true in "family" matters like family and probate law. I am sorry she took it otherwise.

I certainly encourage individuals in contentious situations to involve an attorney Unfortunately, even having a valid case does not mean that the person can afford the services of an attorney. In my own experience in the last year, the opposing party simply being unresponsive to a legal requirement (in one case filing a will for probate or just providing the known beneficiaries with a copy of the will and estate inventory and accounting despite repeated friendly requests) can drive the legal costs beyond reason; being legally correct does not mean that one will get an enforceable order if one cannot afford to pay even reimbursable legal costs up front.

At this time with many proceedings being delayed, child related issues are sadly suffering far more than in the past. Children as well as parents are suffering from the additional stresses. Please consider the unusual situation we are in when replying as your location or financial condition may be faring better than the poster's.

I understand from the OP's posting history that they are rude and want sympathetic legal advice based on no details.

 

[stealth2]

At the end of the day, @t74 ? OP would gain more useful help if s/he provided some details.

 

[Ohiogal]

OG, I believe that the filing of false criminal complaints and the threats of denying visitation/custodial time can be considered "duress" by a person without knowledge of the legal system to represent him/herself and little financial resources to hire legal help. The court system is very intimidating to someone not a part of it.

You are totally wrong by the way about duress. The LEGAL definition is all that matters. And I was not dismissive. I simply responded that what was "defined" as duress by the OP was NOT duress.

 

[not2cleverRed]

You are totally wrong by the way about duress. The LEGAL definition is all that matters. And I was not dismissive. I simply responded that what was "defined" as duress by the OP was NOT duress.

And this is a legal forum.

Misusing legal terms in court hurts ones credibility.

Stating your reasons for wanting to modify a court order without leading with the strongest, most legally relevant facts, can not only bite you in the butt that day, but bite your butt forever after, because courts keep track of these things.

It's not being "dismissive" to tell the truth. Better that OP knows it before being made a fool.

Sometimes it is better to tolerate "less than perfect" and wait until you have a real reason. And sometimes things correct themselves while you're waiting.