NM: Can a stipulated custody order be challenged?

[Qiggli]

What is the name of your state?New Mexico
Can the court be challenged by entering a stipulated custody order if that custody order contains provisions harmful to the child? In other words, can one argue the court should not have approved a custody order just because it was signed by both parents? (I understand that it is odd for a parent to challenge something they themselves signed but I have my reasons for asking this). Thanks

 

[Just Blue]

What is the name of your state?New Mexico
Can the court be challenged by entering a stipulated custody order if that custody order contains provisions harmful to the child? In other words, can one argue the court should not have approved a custody order just because it was signed by both parents? (I understand that it is odd for a parent to challenge something they themselves signed but I have my reasons for asking this). Thanks

Why would the parents sign an agreement if it is harmful to the child?
How is the child harmed by the agreement?
Are you one of the parents of this child? If not, who are you in the situation?
Did the parents have attorneys for the custody case in question?
When was the order put in place?

 

[Just Blue]

px hx

 

[zddoodah]

Can the court be challenged by entering a stipulated custody order if that custody order contains provisions harmful to the child?

Huh? "Can the court be challenged"? I suppose so, but I'm not really sure what that might mean. "Can the court be challenged by entering a stipulated custody order"? That doesn't make sense. Only a court can enter an order, and a court wouldn't challenge itself.

I think your intent here is to ask something about a stipulation that has been presented to a court that contains (in the subjective opinion of some unidentified person) "provisions harmful to the child." However, it's not at all clear what you're asking, and it would be folly to try and answer without some detail about the provisions that are allegedly "harmful to the child."

In other words, can one argue the court should not have approved a custody order just because it was signed by both parents?

Sure. Anyone can argue anything. If you want a response that might be useful, you'll need to provide facts and details about what you're talking about. Answering the questions that "Just Blue" asked would be a good start.

 

[stealth2]

Details matter.

 

[not2cleverRed]

What is the name of your state?New Mexico
Can the court be challenged by entering a stipulated custody order if that custody order contains provisions harmful to the child? In other words, can one argue the court should not have approved a custody order just because it was signed by both parents? (I understand that it is odd for a parent to challenge something they themselves signed but I have my reasons for asking this). Thanks

No.

The correct process is NOT to "challenge the court".

The correct process is a modification of the parenting plan/custody. In order to do this, you need a change of circumstance for the child if the parents aren't in agreement on the modification.

So, what has changed since the court order was entered?

 

[Litigator22]

What is the name of your state?New Mexico
Can the court be challenged by entering a stipulated custody order if that custody order contains provisions harmful to the child? In other words, can one argue the court should not have approved a custody order just because it was signed by both parents? (I understand that it is odd for a parent to challenge something they themselves signed but I have my reasons for asking this). Thanks

Are you aware of what you just wrote? You have asked if it is possible to enter a stipulated custody order [sic] challenging a stipulate custody order. All of which suggests that you didn't understand the stipulation for custody order that you admittedly signed!

Take a break, gather yourself and try to explain.

 

[Zigner]

All of which suggests that you didn't understand the stipulation for custody order that you admittedly signed!

There was no such admission. The OP hasn't even given us any indication of being one of the involved parties (in either of his/her threads).

Everyone may wish to review the other thread from this OP. S/he got snippy right away: https://forum.freeadvice.com/threads/nm-parent-has-not-seen-child-in-2-years-typical-re-integration.659066/

 

[LdiJ]

What is the name of your state?New Mexico
Can the court be challenged by entering a stipulated custody order if that custody order contains provisions harmful to the child? In other words, can one argue the court should not have approved a custody order just because it was signed by both parents? (I understand that it is odd for a parent to challenge something they themselves signed but I have my reasons for asking this). Thanks

This is very general advice. A stipulated order is an agreed upon order. If one of the parties no longer agrees with the stipulation then that party would file for a modification of the custody orders based on what they no longer agree upon. In order to convince a judge to change the custody orders would be to demonstrate a change in circumstances in the life of the child, that makes the change necessary to promote the best interest of the child.

 

[not2cleverRed]

Are you aware of what you just wrote? You have asked if it is possible to enter a stipulated custody order [sic] challenging a stipulate custody order. All of which suggests that you didn't understand the stipulation for custody order that you admittedly signed!

Take a break, gather yourself and try to explain.

Tell us how you really feel.

 

[Ohiogal]

If you agreed upon it recently, you could possibly appeal it to a higher court. But seriously, that is little chance of succeeding.

 

[not2cleverRed]

If you agreed upon it recently, you could possibly appeal it to a higher court. But seriously, that is little chance of succeeding.

Based on the posting history, that little chance goes down to zero without competent legal representation.

Whether it is worth pursuing depends on what is meant by "harmful to the child".

If it's trivial (non-life threatening), then there is little to no chance. Even if there are potential long term consequences. Not making the kid brush their teeth or not making sure they do their homework or other parenting differences is not worth litigating in most cases.

If it's not trivial (abusive or life threatening), then there may be a point in doing something. BUT, even then, there is a fine dance one has to do to show that in court, and my observation has been that lay people are very good at shooting themselves in the foot when they open their mouths in court.

 

[Qiggli]

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

 

[Just Blue]

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

Please answer the questions I asked in post #2. Thank You...

 

[stealth2]

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

Details still matter.