Common As Dirt - Another Case Record

[Canadaguy]

At the end of the day you have to decide what you want for your kids.

Do you want to be an active parent involved in their daily lives and decisions that have to be made in raising them? Do you want to see them as much as possible now and in the future or are you okay with only seeing them a few times a month and allowing your ex to decide what schools they attend, etc?

Do you want to pay tons of support to your ex for her to freely spend on herself and not necessarily on the kids or would you rather pay less and use that extra money to put towards your kids in how you see fit?

It is important to write an agreement and get a court order that defines everything as much as possible so that you don't have to continuously go back to court, ever again. Get the big stuff defined now in writing and the little stuff can be reviewed and changed annually, possibly without court if you and your ex can agree on it.

 

[ninehundredt]

At the end of the day you have to decide what you want for your kids.

Do you want to be an active parent involved in their daily lives and decisions that have to be made in raising them? Do you want to see them as much as possible now and in the future or are you okay with only seeing them a few times a month and allowing your ex to decide what schools they attend, etc?

Do you want to pay tons of support to your ex for her to freely spend on herself and not necessarily on the kids or would you rather pay less and use that extra money to put towards your kids in how you see fit?

It is important to write an agreement and get a court order that defines everything as much as possible so that you don't have to continuously go back to court, ever again. Get the big stuff defined now in writing and the little stuff can be reviewed and changed annually, possibly without court if you and your ex can agree on it.

I agree with your position. Much of my request has been created based on advice from several lawyers I consulted with. As I stated previously, the judge presiding over the case apparently doesn't do shared custody, and the children's ages have also been used as a basis for not pushing for a 50/50 arrangement.

So from the feedback I'm getting on here are these lawyers blowing smoke, or simply looking for the easy way out?

And what of the judge? Should the judges stance be taken into consideration, or should I simply challenge the normal paradigm and have low expectations of the outcome I'm looking for?

 

[Canadaguy]

I agree with your position. Much of my request has been created based on advice from several lawyers I consulted with. As I stated previously, the judge presiding over the case apparently doesn't do shared custody, and the children's ages have also been used as a basis for not pushing for a 50/50 arrangement.

So from the feedback I'm getting on here are these lawyers blowing smoke, or simply looking for the easy way out?

And what of the judge? Should the judges stance be taken into consideration, or should I simply challenge the normal paradigm and have low expectations of the outcome I'm looking for?

If you do a search there is an articles about the 10 year doctrine and how it is not relevant today. There is also stuff written on why 2 year old need to be with both parents, not just one.

If your lawyers are against shared custody, IMO you should get one who is for it because they will work for you and have the experience in what it takes to convince a judge it is the best for the kids.

Plus your case will take a year to resolve, judges might change by then. Status quo is key at this point for you.

 

[DowntroddenDad]

I agree with your position. Much of my request has been created based on advice from several lawyers I consulted with. As I stated previously, the judge presiding over the case apparently doesn't do shared custody, and the children's ages have also been used as a basis for not pushing for a 50/50 arrangement.

So from the feedback I'm getting on here are these lawyers blowing smoke, or simply looking for the easy way out?

And what of the judge? Should the judges stance be taken into consideration, or should I simply challenge the normal paradigm and have low expectations of the outcome I'm looking for?

You need to get your terminology correct.

Custody doesn't have anything to do with hours, it is decision making ability. Unless she can prove you are an unfit parent, she will have an uphill battle getting sole custody.

Access is what you are looking at. Again if you are a fit parent, you should be able to propose a schedule for parenting that gives you reasonable access. If you get more than 40% access, then your child support will go down. So don't go for 50/50. ask for 40/60 and have a clause to review based on the age of the children.

 

[ninehundredt]

You need to get your terminology correct.

Custody doesn't have anything to do with hours, it is decision making ability. Unless she can prove you are an unfit parent, she will have an uphill battle getting sole custody.

Access is what you are looking at. Again if you are a fit parent, you should be able to propose a schedule for parenting that gives you reasonable access. If you get more than 40% access, then your child support will go down. So don't go for 50/50. ask for 40/60 and have a clause to review based on the age of the children.

I'm presently asking for 40/60 with a clause in the agreement stipulating more access based on age.

So to clarify the difference between joint and shared custody is strictly related to child support breakdowns, since the parent's already have equal decision making rights with joint?

 

[Canadaguy]

I'm presently asking for 40/60 with a clause in the agreement stipulating more access based on age.

So to clarify the difference between joint and shared custody is strictly related to child support breakdowns, since the parent's already have equal decision making rights with joint?

By doing that you are asking for shared physical custody (based on the amount of time each parent spends with the child(ren) which 40-60 is considered the same as 50-50) with joint custody for decision making of the child(ren).

The first type of custody is where the battle always is because it is over money. The second is usually joint where both parents have to agree on religion and other major decisions for the child(ren). Minor decisions are usually made by the parent who has more control, spends more time with the child(ren) or gets labeled the primary parent. This is what you want to avoid happening if you want the opportunity to have equal parenting rights with your child(ren).

 

[HammerDad]

So don't go for 50/50. ask for 40/60 and have a clause to review based on the age of the children.

I don't agree with this for the simple reasoning of optics.

40% is the minimum threshold for offset c/s and shared parenting. Aiming right at that number could be seen as an attempt to avoid full c/s, not as a valid attempt at parenting the child(ren). Plus, even at 40% of the parenting time, a court can use its discretion to cause the parent with 40% to still pay full c/s.

Request 50/50, but be willing to settle for 60/40. You don't go in with your bare minimum, you go in higher and settle for lower.

Plus, if you are going for shared parenting strictly as a means to avoid paying full c/s, you are doing it wrong....

 

[FightingForFamily]

And what of the judge? Should the judges stance be taken into consideration, or should I simply challenge the normal paradigm and have low expectations of the outcome I'm looking for?

More than 95% of case are settled without a trial, so the judges decision only factors into the top 5% of the craziest/richest who can afford to pursue the matter to that level.

Almost all cases are settled after one or more conferences with strongly worded advice from judges perhaps with the assistance of mediators. Lawyers generally do nothing to resolve conflict, that's not their jobs. As far as I can tell, most of what they do is complicate matters and rile up the other side with inflammatory letters. Sometimes they file some paperwork. Remember your lawyer works for you and will conduct your case how you tell them to. If you don't give them good/enough direction, they will stray and do whatever they think is necessary to make some billable hours on the file.

 

[ninehundredt]

I don't agree with this for the simple reasoning of optics.

40% is the minimum threshold for offset c/s and shared parenting. Aiming right at that number could be seen as an attempt to avoid full c/s, not as a valid attempt at parenting the child(ren). Plus, even at 40% of the parenting time, a court can use its discretion to cause the parent with 40% to still pay full c/s.

Request 50/50, but be willing to settle for 60/40. You don't go in with your bare minimum, you go in higher and settle for lower.

Plus, if you are going for shared parenting strictly as a means to avoid paying full c/s, you are doing it wrong....

This is along the lines of what I've heard. Following this logic I should modify my request for visitation time only so I have a bit more to bargain with. I'm content with continuing to pay the full guideline child support for both children, regardless of whether our agreement is 60/40 or 50/50.

 

[ninehundredt]

More than 95% of case are settled without a trial, so the judges decision only factors into the top 5% of the craziest/richest who can afford to pursue the matter to that level.

Almost all cases are settled after one or more conferences with strongly worded advice from judges perhaps with the assistance of mediators. Lawyers generally do nothing to resolve conflict, that's not their jobs. As far as I can tell, most of what they do is complicate matters and rile up the other side with inflammatory letters. Sometimes they file some paperwork. Remember your lawyer works for you and will conduct your case how you tell them to. If you don't give them good/enough direction, they will stray and do whatever they think is necessary to make some billable hours on the file.

I will not have a lawyer attending any case conferences. I have made several requests to the other party to do mediation, but they have declined each one.

What can I expect at the initial case conference? Can someone give me a run down of how long they last and what happens? I've read countless threads, but none really detail what actually happens during the conference.

 

[MrToronto]

The KEY is being settled....the other KEY is living close...The sad part about the PROCESS is it expects the separated parent to build up what 2 parents did over years!

IF you live close it offsets the "parenting plan" because any school or childs activity they have with ex you'll do....no change

It's also least disruptive to kids for drive/pickups

Nothing wrong with being a self rep it'll save money for renting a house or 3 bedroom condo near your kids. Try not to lose the shared custody or split custody.

If you give in too sole custody...it's never going to change and if she hates you your kids are never going to visit family in the States without a major Court battle

keep chatting through the CC agree to nothing but 50-50 and postion yourself well the process drags on to PROVE 50-50 is absolutely 100 percent do-able and get somebody to to watch kids (just like your ex) to watch the kids when you go to work.

there's gonna be a snow storm of people telling you to give up...ignore them

 

[ninehundredt]

The KEY is being settled....the other KEY is living close...The sad part about the PROCESS is it expects the separated parent to build up what 2 parents did over years!

IF you live close it offsets the "parenting plan" because any school or childs activity they have with ex you'll do....no change

It's also least disruptive to kids for drive/pickups

Nothing wrong with being a self rep it'll save money for renting a house or 3 bedroom condo near your kids. Try not to lose the shared custody or split custody.

If you give in too sole custody...it's never going to change and if she hates you your kids are never going to visit family in the States without a major Court battle

keep chatting through the CC agree to nothing but 50-50 and postion yourself well the process drags on to PROVE 50-50 is absolutely 100 percent do-able and get somebody to to watch kids (just like your ex) to watch the kids when you go to work.

there's gonna be a snow storm of people telling you to give up...ignore them

It sounds like I'm on the right track. I've been renting a half of a house since the separation, and am gainfully employed / settled in the area. The children live approximately 30 minutes from me presently, but it's not too difficult to work around.

So the case conference is basically a documented informal conversation between parties?

 

[FightingForFamily]

The judge will put strong pressure on either party telling them how they would rule if this was a trial, based on the incomplete information they have. They will warn either party if their position is unreasonable and that proceeding to a trial will be costly for the loser - so you should listen to their advice. It is often quite intimidating and many times parties will concede immediately or leave the room to negotiate in private.

The judge will also put enormous pressure on either party to make any possible agreements before them on consent right now.

Otherwise, they may make procedural orders, such as ordering either party to produce more documentation, update their financial statements and such.

Although technically the judge can't force you to agree or sign anything during a conference, it rarely feels that way.

For some matters that are extremely contested or complicated, the CC judge's incomplete information and knowledge may make their recommendations completely wrong because only a full trial would allow a judge to understand the whole picture. But usually there is a lot to learn during the CC.

After the CC, you will have to determine the next step. Is it a proper settlement conference with another judge? Are there motions to be addressed? Do we need to schedule a trial? Do we need more case conferences to deal with procedural pre-trial issues?

 

[ninehundredt]

The judge will put strong pressure on either party telling them how they would rule if this was a trial, based on the incomplete information they have. They will warn either party if their position is unreasonable and that proceeding to a trial will be costly for the loser - so you should listen to their advice. It is often quite intimidating and many times parties will concede immediately or leave the room to negotiate in private.

The judge will also put enormous pressure on either party to make any possible agreements before them on consent right now.

Otherwise, they may make procedural orders, such as ordering either party to produce more documentation, update their financial statements and such.

Although technically the judge can't force you to agree or sign anything during a conference, it rarely feels that way.

For some matters that are extremely contested or complicated, the CC judge's incomplete information and knowledge may make their recommendations completely wrong because only a full trial would allow a judge to understand the whole picture. But usually there is a lot to learn during the CC.

After the CC, you will have to determine the next step. Is it a proper settlement conference with another judge? Are there motions to be addressed? Do we need to schedule a trial? Do we need more case conferences to deal with procedural pre-trial issues?

This is the initial case conference, and from what you're saying it will be an introduction to the process more than anything. I haven't brought any motions, as they would have to be EM's for which there is no urgency.

As for any evidence I have in support of my case (emails)....can this be shown during the CC, or must it be filed prior to the conference?

 

[FB_]

This is the initial case conference, and from what you're saying it will be an introduction to the process more than anything. I haven't brought any motions, as they would have to be EM's for which there is no urgency.

As for any evidence I have in support of my case (emails)....can this be shown during the CC, or must it be filed prior to the conference?

There is no point in showing anything during a conference. A conference is not to prove anything it's to settle.

Most are a complete waste of time. The only thing good in mine was I got consent to take my kids on a cruise. We were doing an in home separation so things were different for me.

 

[Canadaguy]

This is the initial case conference, and from what you're saying it will be an introduction to the process more than anything. I haven't brought any motions, as they would have to be EM's for which there is no urgency.

As for any evidence I have in support of my case (emails)....can this be shown during the CC, or must it be filed prior to the conference?

If she is denying you access at all to the kids an emergency motion will have to be filled to get temporary schedule put in place until the final order is made.

Maybe others can give advise on how to file this motion and when since your application has already reached the conference. It might be a good idea to get police enforcement if needed if she won't give up the kids to you.

 

[ninehundredt]

There is no point in showing anything during a conference. A conference is not to prove anything it's to settle.

Most are a complete waste of time. The only thing good in mine was I got consent to take my kids on a cruise. We were doing an in home separation so things were different for me.

I've been advised by a lawyer that I may file a notice of motion on the day of the initial conference seeking access / visitation. The other party is presently not allowing me to see the kids unless they feel accommodating at that time.

 

[FB_]

I've been advised by a lawyer that I may file a notice of motion on the day of the initial conference seeking access / visitation. The other party is presently not allowing me to see the kids unless they feel accommodating at that time.

Agreed. I was able to do the same. I needed a long motion. The next available date was 6 months away.

 

[Canadaguy]

Agreed. I was able to do the same. I needed a long motion. The next available date was 6 months away.

So you went 6 months without seeing your kids? That's crazy! Did you file an emergency long motion? What happened at the end FB, did the judge go against status quo and decide on 50/50 shared or EOW screw job?

 

[FB_]

So you went 6 months without seeing your kids? That's crazy! Did you file an emergency long motion? What happened at the end FB, did the judge go against status quo and decide on 50/50 shared or EOW screw job?

As I said my situation was much different. I was going through an in home separation where we were each doing 50/50.

My point was court dates don't just appear. They need to be scheduled. It could take 1-2 months to get a short motion in front of a judge.

I have first hand knowledge of someone having to wait 9 months before they saw their kids.