New crap from Ex

[CJane]

What is the name of your state? MO

I got a letter on Thursday from my attorney, notifying me of a hearing coming up this Thursday. Apparently, my ex-husband has filed a motion to ammend the current order back to the original order. He's claiming that I did not meet my burden of proof that there was a change in circumstances and so never should have been allowed to file the original modification, nor had my case heard.

This is a timeline of how things progressed re: my filing for modification...

• Ex and I had been having a lot of disagreements about which rights and responsibilities we each had wrt the children and decision making.
• Ex began threatening to withhold visitation from me on a fairly regular basis... often stating that because he had sole legal custody, my 'visitation' was at his discretion.
• Ex began talking about moving to a location that would have interfered with our current custody arrangement, changed their school, etc.
• Ex began planning his wedding.
• I filed for a modification.
• I moved in with my boyfriend.
• Ex got married (3 days after I moved)
• I found out I was pregnant.
• Ex's wife found out she was pregnant.
• Ex filed his response to my motion to modify... stating my move as a change in circumtances.
• Lots and lots and lots of crap.
• Judge stated that the original order was crap, and he couldn't believe any idiot actually signed it into an order.
• I won the battle and was awarded joint-legal, no changes to physical time with the kids, and child support.
• Ex has asked me to forego child support in order to help him out of a 'financial bind'.
• Ex is again talking about moving/changing schools/etc.
• Ex has unilaterally changed the children's pediatrician.
• Ex has lied to me (or, been incorrect about dates) about dental appts for the children.
  

SO... my questions are (because I can't get in touch with my attorney til tomorrow)...

With all of the above changes in our lives over the past two years... can he really pull the 'no change in circumstances' thing?

How does a 'hearing' usually go? My only experience is with the trial.

Is there an opportunity to bring up the issues we've had in the last couple of months at the hearing?

 

[Zephyr]

I think because he asked for your move to be considered a change in circumstance that he will not be able to use no change in circumstance as an arguement

 

[LdiJ]

What is the name of your state? MO

I got a letter on Thursday from my attorney, notifying me of a hearing coming up this Thursday. Apparently, my ex-husband has filed a motion to ammend the current order back to the original order. He's claiming that I did not meet my burden of proof that there was a change in circumstances and so never should have been allowed to file the original modification, nor had my case heard.

This is a timeline of how things progressed re: my filing for modification...

• Ex and I had been having a lot of disagreements about which rights and responsibilities we each had wrt the children and decision making.
• Ex began threatening to withhold visitation from me on a fairly regular basis... often stating that because he had sole legal custody, my 'visitation' was at his discretion.
• Ex began talking about moving to a location that would have interfered with our current custody arrangement, changed their school, etc.
• Ex began planning his wedding.
• I filed for a modification.
• I moved in with my boyfriend.
• Ex got married (3 days after I moved)
• I found out I was pregnant.
• Ex's wife found out she was pregnant.
• Ex filed his response to my motion to modify... stating my move as a change in circumtances.
• Lots and lots and lots of crap.
• Judge stated that the original order was crap, and he couldn't believe any idiot actually signed it into an order.
• I won the battle and was awarded joint-legal, no changes to physical time with the kids, and child support.
• Ex has asked me to forego child support in order to help him out of a 'financial bind'.
• Ex is again talking about moving/changing schools/etc.
• Ex has unilaterally changed the children's pediatrician.
• Ex has lied to me (or, been incorrect about dates) about dental appts for the children.
  

SO... my questions are (because I can't get in touch with my attorney til tomorrow)...

With all of the above changes in our lives over the past two years... can he really pull the 'no change in circumstances' thing?

How does a 'hearing' usually go? My only experience is with the trial.

Is there an opportunity to bring up the issues we've had in the last couple of months at the hearing?

Its almost guaranteed that the judge is going to deny his motion. The judge thoroughly heard the case, there was a GAL involved, there is virtually no chance that the judge is going to vacate his ruling.

However, you might discuss with your attorney whether or not you should file contempt against dad for changing the children's pediatrician without your agreement, on the dental appointment issues, and if he isn't paying his child support, for non-payment of the child support. Your attorney may feel that its appropriate, your attorney may feel the timing is wrong....but discuss that with your attorney.

Your ex needs to realize that he is no longer in charge....and that he no longer can make the decisions that he is attempting to make without your agreement.

 

[CJane]

I think because he asked for your move to be considered a change in circumstance that he will not be able to use no change in circumstance as an arguement

I was thinking that too. Also, that if his attorney thought there was no change in circumstance, they could have just asked that my original motion be dismissed instead of going through a year of fighting and a trial. And if at any point the GAL or the judge could have examined everything and decided there was no change. Right?

 

[weenor]

What is the name of your state? MO

I got a letter on Thursday from my attorney, notifying me of a hearing coming up this Thursday. Apparently, my ex-husband has filed a motion to ammend the current order back to the original order. He's claiming that I did not meet my burden of proof that there was a change in circumstances and so never should have been allowed to file the original modification, nor had my case heard.

This is a timeline of how things progressed re: my filing for modification...

• Ex and I had been having a lot of disagreements about which rights and responsibilities we each had wrt the children and decision making.
• Ex began threatening to withhold visitation from me on a fairly regular basis... often stating that because he had sole legal custody, my 'visitation' was at his discretion.
• Ex began talking about moving to a location that would have interfered with our current custody arrangement, changed their school, etc.
• Ex began planning his wedding.
• I filed for a modification.
• I moved in with my boyfriend.
• Ex got married (3 days after I moved)
• I found out I was pregnant.
• Ex's wife found out she was pregnant.
• Ex filed his response to my motion to modify... stating my move as a change in circumtances.
• Lots and lots and lots of crap.
• Judge stated that the original order was crap, and he couldn't believe any idiot actually signed it into an order.
• I won the battle and was awarded joint-legal, no changes to physical time with the kids, and child support.
• Ex has asked me to forego child support in order to help him out of a 'financial bind'.
• Ex is again talking about moving/changing schools/etc.
• Ex has unilaterally changed the children's pediatrician.
• Ex has lied to me (or, been incorrect about dates) about dental appts for the children.
  

SO... my questions are (because I can't get in touch with my attorney til tomorrow)...

With all of the above changes in our lives over the past two years... can he really pull the 'no change in circumstances' thing?

How does a 'hearing' usually go? My only experience is with the trial.

Is there an opportunity to bring up the issues we've had in the last couple of months at the hearing?

However it is titled, it sounds like your ex filed a Motion for Reconsideration of the court's previous judgment. You have indicated that you both went before the court and a ruling was issued. Without a material change since the last order, ex can only ask the judge to take a second look at the evidence that was before the court at the last hearing. Most of the time a judge will not reconsider decisions of fact without a compelling reason. However, in some states post trial motions are required in order to appeal up the appellate court. The rationale is that the trial court must be made aware of its mistake before an appellate court will look at it. What is your attorney saying?

 

[NotSoNew]

don't you love when this stuff happens and you can't get in touch with your attorney (like on a friday evening!)

it sounds like he is really grasping at straws! he is really a peice of work huh?

 

[CJane]

if he isn't paying his child support, for non-payment of the child support.

He's paying. He's just bitching about it and begging me to sign an affidavit releasing him from the obligation, but he's paying.

Your ex needs to realize that he is no longer in charge....and that he no longer can make the decisions that he is attempting to make without your agreement.

Oh, I agree. And I'm fairly certain that this new ploy is really only an effort to change things back the way they were so that he can 1) Move and 2) not pay support.

 

[CJane]

Without a material change since the last order, ex can only ask the judge to take a second look at the evidence that was before the court at the last hearing.

I've searched my old posts, and I've googled today too... can't find what I'm looking for, but I swear that I've read that in Missouri when an agreement is reached outside of trial, then a change in circumstances is not necessary in order to file to modify that order. The premise being that the court never heard the original case, no judgement was made, and so no change is required in order to revisit the issues and modify the plan. Am I hallucinating all of that?

However, in some states post trial motions are required in order to appeal up the appellate court. The rationale is that the trial court must be made aware of its mistake before an appellate court will look at it. What is your attorney saying?

Well crap. I hadn't actually thought of the whole appellate court thing. Thanks so much for feeding the ulcer.

 

[weenor]

I've searched my old posts, and I've googled today too... can't find what I'm looking for, but I swear that I've read that in Missouri when an agreement is reached outside of trial, then a change in circumstances is not necessary in order to file to modify that order. The premise being that the court never heard the original case, no judgement was made, and so no change is required in order to revisit the issues and modify the plan. Am I hallucinating all of that?

No your not... I was hoping that you and ex presented evidence to the judge. If you had then everyone had the opportunity for the judge to look at everything. But still bear in mind that if you settled out of court, ex still looks like an idiot for changing his mind and the judge will want to know whyWell crap. I hadn't actually thought of the whole appellate court thing. Thanks so much for feeding the ulcer.

If there was no hearing or actual decision rendered by the judge on the basis of evidence presented at the hearing then you're fine- no decision to appeal. I'm just getting confused as to whether you had a hearing or an out of court settlement.

 

[Zephyr]

her very first order was an agreement- so she is thinking that his arguement that there wasn't a change in circumstances won't work- because there didn't need to be a COC


the current order was not an agreement

 

[CJane]

If there was no hearing or actual decision rendered by the judge on the basis of evidence presented at the hearing then you're fine- no decision to appeal. I'm just getting confused as to whether you had a hearing or an out of court settlement.

Yeah, I'm not being clear.

The original plan - the one awarding him sole legal custody and me more physical time with the kids than the had... the plan that the judge was referring to when he said "What kind of idiot signed this thing anyway?"... was an agreement reached out of court.

The new order which was issued by the judge in April was a result of invlovement with a GAL, many depositions and a 9 hour trial in which much evidence was presented and testimony heard.

What the ex is asking for is for the court to rule that I never should have been 'allowed' to file the modification, and therefore, we should revert to the original order.

Does that make more sense?

What I was asking in my previous post was... since the original parenting plan was agreed to w/out a hearing/trial, was a change of circumstance actually required in order to file for a modification?

 

[CJane]

her very first order was an agreement- so she is thinking that his arguement that there wasn't a change in circumstances won't work- because there didn't need to be a COC


the current order was not an agreement

Yeah, what Zephyr said.

Thanks Z, for being my brain cell when I can't seem to locate any.

 

[LdiJ]

Yeah, I'm not being clear.

The original plan - the one awarding him sole legal custody and me more physical time with the kids than the had... the plan that the judge was referring to when he said "What kind of idiot signed this thing anyway?"... was an agreement reached out of court.

The new order which was issued by the judge in April was a result of invlovement with a GAL, many depositions and a 9 hour trial in which much evidence was presented and testimony heard.

What the ex is asking for is for the court to rule that I never should have been 'allowed' to file the modification, and therefore, we should revert to the original order.

Does that make more sense?

What I was asking in my previous post was... since the original parenting plan was agreed to w/out a hearing/trial, was a change of circumstance actually required in order to file for a modification?

Your "change of circumstance" was that he wasn't effectively co-parenting the children.....AND your move, since he himself made that the "change of circumstance".
Don't fret over this too much. I sincerely doubt the judge would even consider vacating the order....particularly since he had ample opportunity to bring this up prior to the trial and ruling.

 

[rmet4nzkx]

Your ex has a right to file for reconcideration and has stated his grounds.

Your timeline was very helpful after hundreds of posts, you finally focused.

This is a timeline of how things progressed re: my filing for modification...

* Ex and I had been having a lot of disagreements about which rights and responsibilities we each had wrt the children and decision making.
* Ex began threatening to withhold visitation from me on a fairly regular basis... often stating that because he had sole legal custody, my 'visitation' was at his discretion.
* Ex began talking about moving to a location that would have interfered with our current custody arrangement, changed their school, etc.
* Ex began planning his wedding.
* I filed for a modification.

I stopped here because these are the grounds for his appeal, that you had no change in circumstance when you appealed and all the other things that happened subsequent are not a change in circumstance. You and your ex had discussions ans disagreements, in fact you had much more communicaiton and access to your children than most NCP's when they don't have joint legal custody.
1. Since you didn't have joint legal custody that was not a change in circumstance.
2. If he had "sole" custody, then his belief that he had some say in visitation has merit how often did he withhold visitation prior to you filing for modificaiton?
3. Talk about potential move is not a change and CP's with joint legal custody are required to get permission to move certain distances depending on the state laws or orders,those with sole custody are not so you were getting more than most, talk in and of it's self is not a change in circumstances. but you didn't tell him that you were going to move and create a change circumstance, he covered his bases, you did not.
4. Ex planning his wedding, is not a change in circumstance, he was not breaking your agreement re not having unrelated adults in the home with the children, he was legally free to marry, he didn't move himself or the children and in fact his new wife provided daycare for you eventually so you would be estopped.
BUT his marriage is what apparently triggered you to file to modify the agreement even though there was no change in circumstance until AFTER you filed and all were things YOU did and withheld prior to filing.
That is what he is saying when he said there was no change in circumstances when you filed. In his response, he rightly countered with the evidence that you changed circumstances by moving without required notice, you created the distance etc. after you filed, his responsive filing would not have been necessary if you had notified him of your move as required so you can't use his responsive filing as your burden of proof for the circumstances prior to your filing, everything else is irrelevant. If you had provided him with required notice of your move and change in circumstances, and he filed, it would have been his burden of proof.

Your timing was off.

If the judge reconsiders, he can vacate the latest ruling once the timeline is laid out as clearly as you have done it here.

Then you would start over.

 

[LdiJ]

Rmet.....how about you just stay off CJane's threads from now on? You have no interest in helping her and everything that you said would happen, didn't....and won't happen this time around either.