CP now wants to move to another state.

[Neal1421]

Back with a twist in all of this...

Ok, so immediately does not necessarily mean immediatly I guess. Hubby just got the order that was signed by the judge from his lawyer yesterday. I understand things take time.

Anyway, there was the order to my husband and the order that was sent to the city where she currently resides' sheriff's office. Well, we check the mail today and notice that there is an "order" that was sent from his ex's former attorney. When I say former, I mean an attorney from 2006. Anyway, this order states that the judge gave her permission to move and that is why she left the state. This order is saying that on the hearing that they had in May (which never happened, the hearing that they had was in March), the transcripts show that the judge said that he couldn't do anything to stop her from leaving the state but that the father had also filed for a change of custody for several reasons, one of which included the improper notification of her leaving the state. This order was not signed by the judge, only the attorney.

There are several things that just aren't right with this "so called order". One, it wasn't signed by the judge. Two, the hearing was in March and not May. Three, the attorney that claims to have filed this order was not her lawyer during the proceedings at the time. Fourth, this "order" was not in any of the court files. My husband never received a copy. A copy was never sent to the county to which the case was transferred and her lawyer at the last hearing had no knowledge of the "order".

It is my belief that her lawyer went back to her after the last hearing and told her that she needed to find an order where the judge said that she could leave the state and this is what she came up with.

I have a couple of questions.

1. How much weight will this "order" hold in court?
2. Will this affect my husband being able to get his child now even though there is a signed order after that date from another judge stating that the child is to be remanded to the custody of the father immediately?
3. I guess this goes back to question 1, but do you all see this helping her case any in November when they go back to court?

Thanks!

 

[LdiJ]

Ok, so immediately does not necessarily mean immediatly I guess. Hubby just got the order that was signed by the judge from his lawyer yesterday. I understand things take time.

Anyway, there was the order to my husband and the order that was sent to the city where she currently resides' sheriff's office. Well, we check the mail today and notice that there is an "order" that was sent from his ex's former attorney. When I say former, I mean an attorney from 2006. Anyway, this order states that the judge gave her permission to move and that is why she left the state. This order is saying that on the hearing that they had in May (which never happened, the hearing that they had was in March), the transcripts show that the judge said that he couldn't do anything to stop her from leaving the state but that the father had also filed for a change of custody for several reasons, one of which included the improper notification of her leaving the state. This order was not signed by the judge, only the attorney.

There are several things that just aren't right with this "so called order". One, it wasn't signed by the judge. Two, the hearing was in March and not May. Three, the attorney that claims to have filed this order was not her lawyer during the proceedings at the time. Fourth, this "order" was not in any of the court files. My husband never received a copy. A copy was never sent to the county to which the case was transferred and her lawyer at the last hearing had no knowledge of the "order".

It is my belief that her lawyer went back to her after the last hearing and told her that she needed to find an order where the judge said that she could leave the state and this is what she came up with.

I have a couple of questions.

1. How much weight will this "order" hold in court?
2. Will this affect my husband being able to get his child now even though there is a signed order after that date from another judge stating that the child is to be remanded to the custody of the father immediately?
3. I guess this goes back to question 1, but do you all see this helping her case any in November when they go back to court?

Thanks!

The latest order overrides any previous order...particularly a piece of paper without a judge's signature.

 

[Neal1421]

The latest order overrides any previous order...particularly a piece of paper without a judge's signature.

Thanks, that's what I was thinking.

Another thing about the order that the judge did sign that my husband received from his lawyer yesterday. It states that the mother is to put the child on a plane back to where hubby lives and that she is required to foot the bill for the travel expenses. What happens if she refuses to do so and the sheriffs office has to get involved? Does my husband need to fly there to get her and pay for her ticket to come back as was mentioned when he didn't get her for the summer?

 

[proud_parent]

Thanks, that's what I was thinking.

Another thing about the order that the judge did sign that my husband received from his lawyer yesterday. It states that the mother is to put the child on a plane back to where hubby lives and that she is required to foot the bill for the travel expenses. What happens if she refuses to do so and the sheriffs office has to get involved? Does my husband need to fly there to get her and pay for her ticket to come back as was mentioned when he didn't get her for the summer?

That would be the most expedient way to ensure that the child is returned.

If Dad is forced to collect the child at his own expense, he should petition to find Mom in contempt and request to be reimbursed for all transportation (his own as well as Kiddo's), court costs, and attorney fees.

 

[Neal1421]

That would be the most expedient way to ensure that the child is returned.

If Dad is forced to collect the child at his own expense, he should petition to find Mom in contempt and request to be reimbursed for all transportation (his own as well as Kiddo's), court costs, and attorney fees.

The problem with that is that my husband tried that last time and she as well as the child disappeared for about a week. He took the police over to the house when he went, however the child nor the mother was there so he was unable to get the child and had to return home to go to work. She still has not paid the money that she was ordered to repay then.

She wants to be in control of everything and probably feels as though the only thing she can control at this point is when the child actually arrives here. I can tell that she is grasping at straws by the "so called order" that my husband received today.

 

[proud_parent]

The problem with that is that my husband tried that last time and she as well as the child disappeared for about a week. He took the police over to the house when he went, however the child nor the mother was there so he was unable to get the child and had to return home to go to work. She still has not paid the money that she was ordered to repay then.

She wants to be in control of everything and probably feels as though the only thing she can control at this point is when the child actually arrives here. I can tell that she is grasping at straws by the "so called order" that my husband received today.

Then do what OG already suggested: seek an order from the judge for the police to retrieve the child from Mom.

 

[LdiJ]

Thanks, that's what I was thinking.

Another thing about the order that the judge did sign that my husband received from his lawyer yesterday. It states that the mother is to put the child on a plane back to where hubby lives and that she is required to foot the bill for the travel expenses. What happens if she refuses to do so and the sheriffs office has to get involved? Does my husband need to fly there to get her and pay for her ticket to come back as was mentioned when he didn't get her for the summer?

Yes, he needs to fly there and get her (with the sheriff in tow) and then ask the judge to order that she reimburse him. Of course, she probably won't cooperate with that, but it will just dig a deeper hole for her.

 

[Neal1421]

So, I'm not trying to beat a dead horse but do you all think he should wait and see if she is going to send his daughter now that she has the order or just go there now? He looked at airline tickets there and back and the cheapest he could find were around $1,200 all together. He wants to go tomorrow so that she can't hide their daughter.

 

[proud_parent]

So, I'm not trying to beat a dead horse but do you all think he should wait and see if she is going to send his daughter now that she has the order or just go there now? He looked at airline tickets there and back and the cheapest he could find were around $1,200 all together. He wants to go tomorrow so that she can't hide their daughter.

Strictly my opinion...

Nothing about Mom's recent behavior gives any indication that she will comply with the new order.

Therefore, if I were Dad, I'd be going with order in hand to get the child so that she can begin school in Dad's community as soon as possible. Even if it meant eating the transportation costs.

 

[Neal1421]

So, my husband left for CO (the state where the mother and child now reside) this morning in order to go retrieve his daughter. He went to the sheriff's office in her county with the order and was told that he needed to go to the courthouse as they could not do anything with an order from another state. I told him to speak with his lawyer before heading to CO, but of course he didn't listen. He wanted to get his child today since he had a feeling she was going to try to pull something.

Anyway, he went to the courthouse and was told that there would have to be a hearing on the matter there. They told him that he would have to stay there in CO until Monday for the hearing so that the mother can be present. Which means that he has to get a hotel room for 3 nights and pay for the rental car for another 3 days. Is this normal when an order is needing to be domesticated as OG suggested, or can the mother of the child go to court and try to lie her way out of everything?

 

[LdiJ]

So, my husband left for CO (the state where the mother and child now reside) this morning in order to go retrieve his daughter. He went to the sheriff's office in her county with the order and was told that he needed to go to the courthouse as they could not do anything with an order from another state. I told him to speak with his lawyer before heading to CO, but of course he didn't listen. He wanted to get his child today since he had a feeling she was going to try to pull something.

Anyway, he went to the courthouse and was told that there would have to be a hearing on the matter there. They told him that he would have to stay there in CO until Monday for the hearing so that the mother can be present. Which means that he has to get a hotel room for 3 nights and pay for the rental car for another 3 days. Is this normal when an order is needing to be domesticated as OG suggested, or can the mother of the child go to court and try to lie her way out of everything?

CO may handle things a bit differently, but often judges will domesticate those kinds of orders on an emergency basis, without holding a hearing. He could simply try to pick up the child in the meantime. If mom is going to get warning anyway that he is there.

 

[Neal1421]

CO may handle things a bit differently, but often judges will domesticate those kinds of orders on an emergency basis, without holding a hearing. He could simply try to pick up the child in the meantime. If mom is going to get warning anyway that he is there.

He's afraid to go to the house without the police present as he knows she will not willingly hand the child over to him knowing that they have a hearing on Monday. He thinks she may try to call the police on her for tresspassing and then try to use that against him when they go back to court.

I guess he will just have to wait until Monday and pray that everything works out for him then.

Thanks.

 

[Isis1]

He's afraid to go to the house without the police present as he knows she will not willingly hand the child over to him knowing that they have a hearing on Monday. He thinks she may try to call the police on her for tresspassing and then try to use that against him when they go back to court.

I guess he will just have to wait until Monday and pray that everything works out for him then.

Thanks.

personally, i'd go to try to pick up child every day. with the police. she can call all she wants. she can prove she is refusing the child each and every day. even if it meant i walked away empty handed until the hearing.

 

[Neal1421]

personally, i'd go to try to pick up child every day. with the police. she can call all she wants. she can prove she is refusing the child each and every day. even if it meant i walked away empty handed until the hearing.

Well, I just mentioned that to him but he said that the judge has ordered that no party leave the county with the child until the hearing on Monday. The kicker is though that the mother would have to be served before the hearing so that she knows what is going on. They are trying to have her served today, but if she isn't then this could go on longer than just 3 days.

What happens if the judge in CO says that he won't allow him to take his daughter for some reason? Then what does he do when he gets back to TN?

 

[proud_parent]

personally, i'd go to try to pick up child every day. with the police. she can call all she wants. she can prove she is refusing the child each and every day. even if it meant i walked away empty handed until the hearing.

Except that the law enforcement has already made it known that they will not get involved without a domesticated order.

I'd say it would be wise for Dad to steer clear of Mom's doorstep until the order is domesticated. Not because Mom might call the cops for trespassing, but rather because that would tip Dad's hand. I'd be worried that if Mom knows Dad is in town, she might attempt to "go underground" before Dad can return with law enforcement present to assist.