Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

How do judges shut down the unreasonable?

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • How do judges shut down the unreasonable?

    How do Judges shut down the unreasonable and WHEN? How much can be done at a case conference? Settlement conference?

    We are going into Case conference in a couple of weeks and lots of post say not much gets done here unless it is consensual. What happens when ex won't agree to ANYTHING? and simply ignores or shuts down any attempts to negotiate on ANY issue? I mean she will do what ever she wants and there is only 1 sentence of their poorly written separation kitchen table agreement. Stating they have joint custody and she has them through the week and 1 weekend. This is so non specific it causes strife for the last 2 years any attempts personal, through lawyers, through1 mediation session, through offers for arbitration, offers of coordination ALL ignored or denied.

    She won't agree to a single issue (holiday access, long weekends, schooling, medical attention, scheduling activities, etc etc etc.) She unilaterally makes all decisions and then says "this is how it is going to be" after the fact. She balks at the notion that joint means anything and assumes she should be granted sole custody because she is the mom. She retaliates against us and against the kids if anyone disagrees with her all mighty decree of how things will be.

    She has zero conscience and is hell bent on winning and power - this has nothing ever to do with the needs of the children.

    She says out right she won't listen or negotiate on any issue until a judge says otherwise.

    When and how quick is a judge going to say anything to make this a level playing field? I honestly don't think she'd even listen to a judge if it didn't suit her.
    Last edited by karmaseeker; 06-23-2011, 08:38 AM.

  • #2
    All you can do is be simple, reasonable, factual and present an offer or application or reply that is sensible and child centric.

    Judges aren't idiots and they will quickly see that the other person is unreasonable if you come across as mature, reasonable and sensible.

    It's essential to not get baited and dragged into an argument. Don't trash the other party. Stick to the facts and draw your lines where you have to.

    Be prepared to compromise, or have a good reason not to. A Case Conference judge won't necessarily stick to the FLA and Federal Guidelines. A compromise means movement from both parties. That said, a judge won't suggest a huge compromise just because the other party is offering down somewhere near $0.

    Comment


    • #3
      I wouldn't expect anything to happen at case conference. Chances are if she is like that you won't see any movement from her until trial is looming, if at all.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by wretchedotis View Post
        I wouldn't expect anything to happen at case conference. Chances are if she is like that you won't see any movement from her until trial is looming, if at all.
        So a judge won't make any temporary orders? Even though she is denying access? Denying the children counselling? and has unilaterally moved the children to a new school?

        Comment


        • #5
          Case conferences produce orders by consent. Therefore, you need to find a path in the conference to obtain orders that seek what you want. Encourage the justice to work on your behalf to convince the opposing party of the correctness of your view and desires.

          Justices see hundreds of cases - do not expect them to be your advocates. They respond to clear facts and arguments put before them. Conferences are doubly hard because they are consent-oriented to seek resolution.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by fieldgrey View Post
            Case conferences produce orders by consent. Therefore, you need to find a path in the conference to obtain orders that seek what you want. Encourage the justice to work on your behalf to convince the opposing party of the correctness of your view and desires.

            Justices see hundreds of cases - do not expect them to be your advocates. They respond to clear facts and arguments put before them. Conferences are doubly hard because they are consent-oriented to seek resolution.

            Our view is really quite simple -

            It is in the best interest of the children to be granted access to mental health professionals.

            It is in the best interest of the children to have as equal access to both parents.

            It is in the best interest for ALL involved to have a clear access schedule to minimize on going conflict.

            It is in the best interest of the children to have a complete section 30 court ordered assessment (in order for it to be seen to fruition so that a professional can determine long term or permanent custody and access). This is her demand to which we are in consent as long it is an agreed upon assessor and court ordered so she can't change her mind half way through. Once this is done we will accept the outcome but are hoping for primary residence with a shared custody agreement because this is the only way we can ensure the children will have equal and fulfilling relationships with BOTH parents which is in the children's best interest.

            We want to promote both parents - the same is not granted to us.

            We are in full agreement for there to be a court order for CS and section 7 so it can be processed through FRO as they can not process her claim to her satisfaction because there are no amounts written on the kitchen table separation agreement except for a lesser amount.

            Comment

            Our Divorce Forums
            Forums dedicated to helping people all across Canada get through the separation and divorce process, with discussions about legal issues, parenting issues, financial issues and more.
            Working...
            X