Just wanted to say thanks again and share

[truebluemd]

Again thanks to all here. I do think anyone who gives up time here deserves much appreciation and I again want to show my appreciation today.

I realize that as I move through this custody nightmare, I learn more and more. I had court yesterday and it really gave me more insight to the court system, at least mine. I learned that the masters and the judges support each others decisions, that they really do frown upon significant others, and they hate troublemakers (motion junkies) and petty parents. they also hate changing orders or finding anyone in contempt (yes, the master said that in his findings).

My ex got a wake up call yesterday in our hearing. The judge dismissed all his motions (contempt, show cause, modification of CS) and my counter motion (modification of visiation), only to clarify the holiday schedule.

He told ex it was clear that he was the cause of the late and missed visits. He brought his mealticket who was immediately escorted outside the courtroom. He rejected hearing mealticket's testimony (whose now ex's fiancee) because in his own words "she is just going to say exactly what Mr. X files said...I'm almost sure of it."

My ex, well more likely his mealticket, retained a lawyer the night before the hearing. The lawyer knew quat about the case. Here is one of the questions he asked me.

Ex Lawyer: If the holiday occurs on 1/1/09, why are you taking holiday visitation on 1/31/08?

Me: Sir the CO states we get EO federal holiday from 6pm the day before the holiday, to 6pm the day of the holiday. Whats relevant is not the holiday, but when the holiday visitation begins as stated in the CO.

My lawyer was great (young but very seasoned). His ex remined me of Ben Stien (the way he talked). We had a two hour wait and my atty actually tried to talk with ex atty to come to an agreement on visitation and child support, although the numbers were still the same. He said "I gotta go make a phone call", and when he returned, he socialized with other lawyers in the waiting room.

In the end, the judge denied everything and sent us on our way. He said the order is clear, and these emails you both speak of cant always be taken as concrete forms of communication. "Someone needs to pick up the phone and dial some numbers and there needs to be some direct dialogue. I dont care who calls who first, but you both need to call and discuss this between yourselves."

My ex was heated. When it was over, I told my lawyer lets just do a calendar. We went to his lawer with the same. Ex lawyer called him over and said we wanna do a calendar. He shook his head no and walked out of the room. He was very mad.

Just wanted to share. We expect exceptions to be filed so its not completely over yet. But it really gave me a much better appreciation of Lawyers, particularily mine. If you can spare the money, get a lawyer to help you.

 

[Ohiogal]

Glad to hear about court and the fact that you learned a lot about what we have been saying here firsthand but had been apprised beforehand about third parties and what not.

 

[truebluemd]

yeah, it really is different to see it happening in court. And I do value the importance of lawyers. And the thing is this was a different master. Trying to sell your SO as someone legal to the matter is a bad move.

In court I think its important to know the details, but dont focus too hard on them because it gets to be tedious explaining. Focus on what the court needs to know to prove your case. Don't complain or whine. My ex tried this again, but my lawyer cut him off at every turn. H has trouble answering yes/no questions and that where he got mad.

LEAVE YOUR EMOTIONS AT THE DOOR. AND DONT GET A LAWYER LESS THAN 24 HOURS BEFORE THE HEARING UNLESS HE'S WILLING TO STAY UP ALL NIGHT TO REVIEW IT. Thats my advice

 

[wileybunch]

Thanks for posting the update. It's good to have it here for those unfamiliar with how things go.

P.S. I realize I'm probably overstepping, but I always go with DH to his family court things as does his ex's DH and we've never had to leave except many years back when DH sought a RO and the judge basically said what the judge here said -- my testimony wouldn't matter since we were engaged to be married so I was to wait in the hall. I'm always well behaved, not so much as a face made, no antagonism, no reactions to what's said, etc. Her DH on the other hand has done those sorts of things, but they're very much into the drama (though have both behaving themselves much better now, but they tend to be on the immature side).

 

[truebluemd]

Thanks wiley. I just wanted to confirm what we say on here a lot. That stepparents, even future stepparents have no rights. Mealticket was made to sit out because she was going to testify. The judge rejected her as a witness cause he said that testimony from SO are all to predictable.

My thing is, my ex brought the marriage license to court, and the lawyer used it as a tactic. I think he also wanted to rub itin my face since I didnt react to the two page (yes two pager) email he sent to announce his marriage and how wonderful his mealticket is. This was in response to an email I sent asking for his new phone number cause he got the old one disconnected.

He wanted to get the master to order that mealticket could pickup and dropoff because she would be future legal mealtick. And he also wanted to portray my ex as the "victim." It was just a bad move. Judges know the bias of SOs and this master was not afraid to put his opinion on record.

 

[MichaCA]

Thanks for sharing your experience. I am curious what this master is. Here in CA sometimes people use "special masters" and I am curious if thats what you have in your case? I have mentioned the term here and no one so far seems to have heard of it. I believe they function pretty similarly to a GAL, but am not sure, and the courts here also utilize GAL's, so I guess I don't have a clue what the diff is between a GAL and special master. I do know the special master makes decisions between parents with joint legal, when they cannot agree. They take a retainer up front, and then work with your case for whatever period of time.

I don't recall your case off the top of my head but it sounds like your ex didn't get to use court to air his grievances...yes! I hope you got what you wanted.

Micha

 

[LdiJ]

Thanks for sharing your experience. I am curious what this master is. Here in CA sometimes people use "special masters" and I am curious if thats what you have in your case? I have mentioned the term here and no one so far seems to have heard of it. I believe they function pretty similarly to a GAL, but am not sure, and the courts here also utilize GAL's, so I guess I don't have a clue what the diff is between a GAL and special master. I do know the special master makes decisions between parents with joint legal, when they cannot agree. They take a retainer up front, and then work with your case for whatever period of time.

I don't recall your case off the top of my head but it sounds like your ex didn't get to use court to air his grievances...yes! I hope you got what you wanted.

Micha

A Special Master in many states is someone similar to a Magistrate. They hear cases and make decisions and rulings but they are under the supervision of a sitting judge.

 

[truebluemd]

Thanks for sharing your experience. I am curious what this master is. Here in CA sometimes people use "special masters" and I am curious if thats what you have in your case? I have mentioned the term here and no one so far seems to have heard of it. I believe they function pretty similarly to a GAL, but am not sure, and the courts here also utilize GAL's, so I guess I don't have a clue what the diff is between a GAL and special master. I do know the special master makes decisions between parents with joint legal, when they cannot agree. They take a retainer up front, and then work with your case for whatever period of time.

I don't recall your case off the top of my head but it sounds like your ex didn't get to use court to air his grievances...yes! I hope you got what you wanted.

Micha

yep he wanted to and before, when we didn have lawyers, we got to say everything we wanted to say, which made for a long hearing of whining and complaining. Not this time.

My ex would say "Well I think Ms TB..." Then my lawyer would say "Answer the question Mr. X files"

At one time his lawyer objected and said "i think Mr. Xfiles should say what he feels" Then the master said, "Well I think he needs to answer Ms. Lawyers question..its a simple yes or no."

LdiJ explained masters correctly. Whatever ruling they make, a judge has to bless it with his signature. GAL's are council/atty for for the children

 

[truebluemd]

I don't recall your case off the top of my head but it sounds like your ex didn't get to use court to air his grievances...yes! I hope you got what you wanted.

Micha

Ex took me to court for contempt for denying him visitation on 3 occasions and he wanted CS reduced. On the first, he got his visitation so there was no contempt.

Contempt got denied cause it was his fault he either got visitation late or not at all, including one where he told me he wasnt coming (obviously a set up). The CS modification got denied cause no change in material circumstance. My visitation counter motion got denied cause he said we just need to talk and work it out. Just a waste of everyone's time and money, but I took away lots of knowledge about the court, mine anyway

 

[MichaCA]

Thanks for the feedback about the special master stuff...I am still a little confused as to how exactly that works here in CA, I will go dredge up some paperwork (somewhere).

Truebluemd, It sounds like your ex basically made a fool of himself! Good for you having a good attitude about the learning experience.

 

[truebluemd]

My first instinct was to immediately work it out. But he even walked away from his lawyer. Thats not a good attitude. We never have to like each other, but we should, at a minimum respect the CO.

 

[wileybunch]

Then the master said, "Well I think he needs to answer Ms. Lawyers question..its a simple yes or no."

I.love.that.

DH's ex's attorney did a lot of hand waving, trying to pump up the drama, even stepped forward between the tables, advancing forward some, and the judge unloaded on him. We got to hear him being lectured about how he had a lot to learn.

A lot of this IS black and white. I don't care how much ninny boo boo crying someone wants to do, yes or no answers is really all that's required for a lot of things. People think if they wave their arms up and down enough that they will make their case. Maybe their friends or people that don't understand expeditious courtroom procedures may be won over and say "you poor thing", but that's not how the court works. Well, it does work with some judges. It would likely work with mine to a point. Thank goodness we don't have custody or visitation issues because I think my ex could tell her a sob story and she'd literally rest her chin on her hand while her face showed various emotions as she bought the story because she's not in enough command of her courtroom. She would never get a sob story from me because I'm not a ninny crybaby.

 

[TinkerBelleLuvr]

The hardest part, when you have an attorney and your X is pro se is sitting there quietly and not saying a word. Granted, with my X, the more he says, the more he makes my case easier.

 

[truebluemd]

The hardest part for me to remember is that what the court really cares about is the law. There were so many objections.

When my ex was talking about an incident where he called the police, my lawyer objected to him saying what the police said. The master said. You can't tell us what the police said. If the police was there, you should have subpoened that policeman to be here."

Again, just so many things I dont know about. Had we both been pro se, he would have been able to say anything he wanted.

 

[Silverplum]

I really appreciate your posting this thread and your insights, TB. Your thread is a very shiny example of the best of learning and sharing our legal knowledge.

Thanks for posting!