Monday, October 27, 2008
oops i forgot to mention....
Now that is some cheap legal advise!
Thursday, October 23, 2008
it lives!
Tuesday, September 09, 2008
i'm still alive
Wednesday, June 04, 2008
holding parents feet to the fire
Once the court enters those orders, they expect you to follow them. If you do not, the aggrieved (pissed off) parent, can sue the other parent for contempt of court.
A suit in Texas for enforcement of a child support order is relatively simple process. An attorney must simply prove that a set amount was payable on a set date at a set place and time, and that those payment were not made. For example, Dad is ordered to pay $500 per month beginning on June 1, 2007 and each first of the month thereafter to the disbursement unit in San Antonio Texas, address 1234 Main Street. If June 2008 rolls around and Dad has not made those payments it is relatively simple to prove that he is in contempt. He knew when he was supposed to pay, how much to pay, and where to pay it. If he does not do it, he is in contempt.
Enforcement of visitation in Texas can be that simple as well, but it rarely ever is. The reason is that the ticked off parent (parent not receiving their visitation) doesn't do what they are supposed to do. Let me explain by example:
Father is awarded custody of the child. He is ordered to provide the child to the mother for her visitation on the first, third and Friday of each month at his residence at 6:00 p.m. Simple enough, correct? Let's add these facts - mom and dad do not get along (i know that is far fetched, but work with me here) and dad makes mom's visits as difficult as possible. Mom calls dad on the first Friday at about 4:00 p.m. to confirm she is picking up the child (which she is not required to do, but does because it takes her 45 minutes through traffic to get to dad's house) and dad says don't bother showing up because the child and I won't be there. The mom makes a note of this and decides to forego the traffic and mess. She'll wait until the next visitation on the third Friday. Same thing happens on third Friday, so mom makes a note of it. She decides if he does it again she is going to sue his pants off. Fifth Friday comes and dad does same thing. Mom decides to sue for enforcement or contempt for the father violating the court's order.
Ruling? Father is not in contempt! WHAT?!! He didn't provide the child, how can he not be in contempt? He is not in contempt because MOM failed to follow the Court's order too! For mom to hold dad in contempt, she needs to appear on the first, third and fifth Friday of each month at dad's house at 6:00 p.m., regardless of whether the child is there or not. That is what the court order said and that is what mother must do. If she follows the court's order, and then dad does not, dad is in contempt.
While my example references a common situation, this same logic applies to other areas of decrees or orders of the court. FOLLOW THE ORDER, NOT WHAT YOUR EX-SPOUSE OR MOM OR DAD OF YOUR CHILD TELLS YOU. If you are unclear how to follow your order or what to do, call a lawyer. Most lawyers will offer free consultations or charge a small fee to speak with them. I do divorces in Plano, Frisco, McKinney (Collin County), and in Dallas, Richardson, Carrollton (Dallas County). I also handle modifications and enforcements of orders.
Moral of the story: If you follow the decree, and ignore what people tell you, you should be well on your way to holding the other parent's feet to the fire!
Check out my new blog at www.thedallasdivorceblog.com
The information contained in this blog is provided for informational (and sometimes entertainment) purposes only and should not be construed as legal advice on any subject matter. I can guarantee you that I am not covering every facet of the family code, and there may be hidden gems in the Family Code that could make or break your case based upon your specific fact situation. No recipients of content from this blog, retained client or otherwise, should act or refrain from acting on the basis of any content included in this blog without seeking the appropriate legal or other professional advice. ALL CASES ARE DIFFERENT BECAUSE OF THE FACTS PARTICULAR TO YOUR CASE; THEREFORE YOU NEED A LAWYER TO DISCUSS THOSE SPECIFIC FACTS. I expressly disclaim all liability in respect to actions taken or not taken based on any or all of the content of this blog. Talk to a lawyer first, preferably me, it is that simple!
Friday, May 16, 2008
danger danger
Monday, April 14, 2008
journaling in texas divorce and modification cases
The information contained in this blog is provided for informational (and sometimes entertainment) purposes only and should not be construed as legal advice on any subject matter. I can guarantee you that I am not covering every facet of the family code, and there may be hidden gems in the Family Code that could make or break your case based upon your specific fact situation. No recipients of content from this blog, retained client or otherwise, should act or refrain from acting on the basis of any content included in this blog without seeking the appropriate legal or other professional advice. ALL CASES ARE DIFFERENT BECAUSE OF THE FACTS PARTICULAR TO YOUR CASE; THEREFORE YOU NEED A LAWYER TO DISCUSS THOSE SPECIFIC FACTS. I expressly disclaim all liability in respect to actions taken or not taken based on any or all of the content of this blog. Talk to a lawyer first, preferably me, it is that simple!
Thursday, March 20, 2008
residency restriction in texas
NOTE: I no longer post or maintain this blog. Please visit my new blog at www.thedallasdivorceblog.com
Thursday, January 31, 2008
grandparent’s rights in texas (Cont.)
In my last post we discussed a very brief background of the evolution of grandparent's rights in Texas. Now I will provide you with a brief synopsis of the law as it currently stands. The information below is taken from the Texas Family Code and an excellent article written by Jimmy L. Verner, Jr. of Verner & Brumley, P.C. I really like the way Mr. Brumley organized and explained the current law as it relates to grandparents seeking rights to their grandchildren. I have made a few changes to the wording to try and simplify the legal jargon. I wanted to put a direct link to the article in this post, but it appears the link is broken on their website. This is the link to their "Resources" page where the article is located. There is tons of good information on this page.
Managing Conservatorship
A grandparent can seek managing conservatorship of a grandchild by original suit or intervention if one or more of the circumstances listed below exist. Managing conservatorship typically means custody in this type of case, but does not have to mean that. It could simply mean that the grandparent has rights to make decisions regarding the grandchild's up-brining. An "intervention" means that there is already a lawsuit pending regarding the child and the grandparent simply joins the lawsuit.
- The grandparent has had actual care, control and possession of the grandchild for at least six months ending not more than 90 days preceding the date of filing the lawsuit. (The 90 day requirement ensures that the 6 month possession was recent and not years and years ago); OR
- The grandchild and the grandchild's guardian, managing conservator, or parent have resided with the grandparent for at least 6 months ending not more than 90 days prior to filing the lawsuit IF the child's guardian, managing conservator, or parent is deceased at the time of the filing of the lawsuit; OR
- The grandchild's present circumstances would significantly impair the grandchild's physical health or emotional development (meaning that where the child currently lives with the parent presents a danger to the child either emotionally or physically) ; OR
- Both the grandchild's parents, the surviving parent, or the managing conservator either filed the lawsuit for the grandparent to have managing conservatorship or have agreed to it.
If any of the above four exists then there may be a case for the grandparent to seek custody or visitation of the grandchild.
Possessory Conservatorship
A grandparent may seek possessory conservatorship of a grandchild by original suit or intervention if one or more of the circumstances listed below exists. Possessory conservatorship is NOT custody and would be more like a visitation lawsuit. However, it differs from a visitation lawsuit in that the grandparent may be granted certain rights with regard to the up-brining of the grandchild.
Original Lawsuit OR Intervention
- The grandparent has had actual care, control and possession of the grandchild for at least six months ending not more than 90 days preceding the date of filing the lawsuit. (The 90 day requirement ensures that the 6 month possession was recent and not years and years ago); OR
- The grandchild and the grandchild's guardian, managing conservator, or parent have resided with the grandparent for at least 6 months ending not more than 90 days prior to filing the lawsuit IF the child's guardian, managing conservator, or parent is deceased at the time of the filing of the lawsuit;
The above two allow the grandparent to file and original suit or an intervention for possessory conservatorship if either is met.
ONLY an Intervention
A grandparent can file ONLY an intervention for possessory conservatorship if the following two are met:
- The grandparent has had substantial past contact with the child; AND
- The grandparent makes satisfactory proof to the court that appointment of a parent as a sole managing conservator or both parents as joint managing conservators would significantly impair the grandchild's physical health or emotional development.
Grandparent Access (Visitation)
A grandparent may seek access to a grandchild by original suit or intervention if ALL THREE numbered circumstances exist PLUS one or more of the lettered circumstances exist:
- At the time the lawsuit is filed, at least one biological or adoptive parent of the grandchild has not had that parent's rights terminated; AND
- The grandparent requesting access to the grandchild proves that denial of access to the grandchild would significantly impair the grandchild's physical health or emotional well-being (this will take more than just the grandparent saying so … you would need a professional to confirm this); AND
- The grandparent requesting access to the grandchild is a parent of a parent of the grandchild; AND
- The parent has been incarcerated in jail or prison during the three month period preceding the filing of the lawsuit; OR
- The parent has been found by a court to be incompetent (a separate lawsuit); OR
- The parent is dead; OR
- The parent does not have actual OR court-ordered possession of or access to the child.
- The parent has been incarcerated in jail or prison during the three month period preceding the filing of the lawsuit; OR
You can see that this statute is very limited. Letters a. through d. severely limits who can file suit. This statute used to include a lettered provision for divorced or separated parents as well as the four you see, but that provision was removed as a result of the Troxel case referred to in my earlier post. You can see what the removal of this provision did to the ability of a grandparent to seek access to their grandchild.
This is simply a quick reference guide to the existing law for grandparents. If you are a grandparent and need help, contact a lawyer to discuss your options. DO NOT simply rely on this post and throw up your hands. There may still be a chance, and until you speak to a lawyer, you will never know.
You can visit my blog at http://chrislawyerblog.com/grandparents-rights/ for more information about me or to contact me.
The information contained in this blog is provided for informational (and sometimes entertainment) purposes only and should not be construed as legal advice on any subject matter. I can guarantee you that I am not covering every facet of the family code, and there may be hidden gems in the Family Code that could make or break your case based upon your specific fact situation. No recipients of content from this blog, retained client or otherwise, should act or refrain from acting on the basis of any content included in this blog without seeking the appropriate legal or other professional advice. ALL CASES ARE DIFFERENT BECAUSE OF THE FACTS PARTICULAR TO YOUR CASE; THEREFORE YOU NEED A LAWYER TO DISCUSS THOSE SPECIFIC FACTS. I expressly disclaim all liability in respect to actions taken or not taken based on any or all of the content of this blog. Talk to a lawyer first, preferably me, it is that simple!