Child Custody Sandra Bullock, Jessie James ,Gosslin , Rodgriguez and the Michgian Court of Appeals

Divorce Lawyer discusses several Divorce Issues:




CHILD CUSTODY IN THE NEWS AND A RECENT OPINION OF THE MICHIGAN APPELLATE COURT



Child Custody battles are common place. The most notable are media celebrities. If it can happen to them it can happen to you.



JON GOSSLIN STOPS CUSTODY BATTLE WITH KATE GOSSELIN



According to TMZ.com the octodad is planning to drop his custody and child support lawsuit against ex Kate Gosselin.[2]

He has reportedly hired a new lawyer since firing his former attorney, Anthony List, the man who called Kate an "absentee mom" and filed legal papers on behalf of Jon seeking full custody of their kids.[2]

"Jon has retained a new lawyer and they're now trying to work out an arrangement that is both private and between themselves," a source told E! Online.[2]

Since there is a noticeably large difference between Jon and Kate's income, the exes are reportedly working together to revise the custody and child support agreement that is currently in action.[2]



SANDRA BULLOCK TO NOT SEEK CUSTODY OF THE CHILDREN OF JESSE JAMES

Actress Sandra Bullock will not be fighting for the custody of love rat husband Jesse James children.. [4]

‘The Blind Side’ actress dumped Jesse after a string of his affairs surfaced last month. And despite her mother -role in the lives of his three children, Bullock’s rep revealed that there would not be a custody battle. [4]


RODRIGUEZ WINS CUSTODY CHANGE AND GETS HIS SON

… because the two weren't married, Tina Helfer had automatic custody and legally Richard Rodriguez could do nothing to get his child back.

"I had no rights," Rodriguez says.[3]

The tables turned in November of 2009 and the court awarded Rodriguez full custody. [[3]


As for Helfer, the Berkshire County District Attorney's office says she won't be facing charges. The office says the "woman had legal custody of Ricky when she left Massachusetts. A year and a half later we hear about a custody change. Our understanding is that this woman had no notice of the change. Therefore, she is not knowingly involved in any criminal violation."[3]




THIS FAMILY LAW CASE FROM WAYNE CIRCUIT COURT FAMILY DIVISION SHOWS THAT WHEN ONE PARENT DENYS PARENTING TIME CUSTODY CAN BE LOST.



Custody; The Child Custody Act (MCL 722.21 et seq.); Fletcher v. Fletcher; Phillips v. Jordan; Reed v. Reed; [1]



Exclusion of evidence related to the defendant-mother's criminal history; [1]



Distinction between evidence to be considered in evaluating the statutory "best interest" factors (MCL 722.23) and evidence admissible in determining whether a "change of circumstances" has occurred; Brausch v. Brausch; MRE 609(c); [1]



Challenges to the trial court's findings on best interest factors (b), (c), (f), and (h); [1]



Principle the best interest factors do not need to be given equal weight; McCain v. McCain; Pierron v. Pierron; Challenge to the trial court's finding "clear and convincing evidence" supported modifying custody; MCL 722.28; MCL 722.27(1)(c); [1]



Whether the trial court considered the parties' ability to cooperate in granting joint legal custody; MCL 722.26a; Fisher v. Fisher; Nielsen v. Nielsen; The parenting time schedule.[1]



The Michigan Court of Appeals decided the trial court’s ( Wayne Circuit Court Family Division) factual findings on the best interest factors were not against the great weight of the evidence, the court held the trial court did not abuse its discretion in modifying custody to grant the parties joint legal and physical custody of their two minor children and setting a parenting time schedule. [1]



THIS IS A POST JUDGEMENT ACTION



The parties separated in 2005.



WHILE DIVORCE UNDERWAY MOM GETS IN FIGHT WITH DADS GIRLFRIEND


The children resided with defendant -MOTHER, until July 2006 when, during the
pendency of the divorce proceedings, defendant was arrested and charged with domestic
violence, assault and robbery pertaining to an incident involving plaintiff and his girlfriend. Following this incident, plaintiff was granted temporary physical custody of the minor children.[1]



DAD GET GIRLFRIEND AND CHILD



After this incident, plaintiff-FATHER was granted temporary physical custody of the children.[1]

DIVORCE JUDGE THOUGHT MOM GOING TO JAIL

In April 2007, the parties were divorced via a consent judgment which, in anticipation of defendant's incarceration due to the July 2006 incident, awarded plaintiff -FATHER temporary legal custody with defendant to have parenting time. [1]

MOM THOUGHT THAT WHEN OUT OF JAIL SHE COULD GET HER CHILD BACK



The judgment provided defendant was to petition the trial court for reinstatement of joint legal custody and additional parenting time after the end of her jail sentence and on showing her compliance with any probation requirements. [1]

MOM IN JAIL 9 DAYS THEN ON TETHER

She was sentenced to a year in jail with work release, but was only required to serve nine days and was released on a tether. She reportedly complied with her probation requirements. [1]

DAD SAID NO PARENTING TIME FOR DAD

Despite the fact defendant did not remain incarcerated and was available, plaintiff denied her parenting time. [1]

COURT FOUND DAD IN CONTEMPT

While the parties entered into a consent order detailing defendant's parenting time, the trial court later found plaintiff-FATHER in contempt for failing to cooperate and for ongoing violation of the parenting time schedule. [1]



In essence, the trial court determined that defendant’s compliance with the terms of her

probation in conjunction with the “ongoing conflict between the parents . . . and the apparent interference . . . regarding mother exercising any parenting time with the children, and the impact that such conflict was having on the minor children” necessitated a review of the existing custody arrangement.[1]



MOM SAYS JUDGE THIS IS NOT WORKING SOMETHING DIFFERENT HAS TO BE ORDERED

Defendant-MOTHER filed a motion for change of custody, seeking joint legal and physical custody. [1]



JUDGE SAYS TO MOM THINGS HAVE CHANGED AND I WILL LISTEN TO WHAN YOU HAVE TO SAY

The trial court, Wayne Circuit Court Family Divison, determined proper cause and a sufficient change in circumstances existed to conduct an evidentiary hearing, and properly applied a clear and convincing evidence standard to decide if a modification in custody was in the children's best interests. [1]



[I]n order to establish a “change of circumstances,” a movant must prove that,

since the entry of the last custody order, the conditions surrounding custody of the

child, which have or could have a significant effect on the child’s well-being,

have materially changed. [Brausch v Brasuch, 283 Mich App 339, 355-356; 770

NW2d 77 (2009), citing Vodvarka v Grasmeyer, 259 Mich App 499, 512-514;

675 NW2d 847 (2003) (emphasis added).][1]



NOT ALL FACTORS IN LIFE ARE EQUAL IN IMPORTANCE



The court MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS noted while plaintiff - FATHER contested the trial court's finding on factor (f), this factor was found to be in his favor and it appeared he misconstrued the precept the factors do not need to be given equal weight. [1]



AFTER INITIAL HURDEL IS MET BY THE CHANGING PARTY THE COURT MUST ANALYIZE THE STATUATORY BEST INTERES FACTORS



As to the other challenged factors, the court concluded the trial court's findings the parties were equal on (b) and (h) while (c) favored defendant were not against the great weight of the evidence. Factor (j) was clearly important to the trial court in weighing the children's best interests. [1]



I THINK J IS THE MOST IMPORTANT SAID THE JUDGE



The trial court, WAYNE, ruled (j) strongly favored defendant and was entitled to "significant weight" in the overall balancing of the factors. [1]



Finding the existence of an established custodial environment with plaintiff, the trial

court properly applied a clear and convincing evidence standard in determining whether an alteration in custody was in the best interests of the children. In evaluating the best interest factors, the trial court found that the parties were equal on seven of the 12 factors.2 Plaintiff was favored on factors (d) [time child has lived in a stable environment] and (f) [moral fitness of the parties]. Defendant was also favored on two factors: (c) [capacity to provide for material needs of child] and (j) [willingness to cooperate and foster relationship]. Although the trial court met, in camera, [ IN JUDGES OFFICE PROBABLY] with both minor children, only the older child was determined to be of sufficient age to express a reasonable preference.3 Following its analysis of the best interest factors, the trial court concluded that custody would be modified so that plaintiff and defendant would have joint legal and physical custody of the minor children and a parenting schedule was delineated. [1]



Clearly, of significant importance to the trial court in weighing the best interests of the

minor children was factor (j), which comprises “the willingness and ability of each of the parties to facilitate and encourage a close and continuing parent/child relationship between the child and the other party.” Reviewing the history of these parties, the trial court noted that defendant had provided “liberal access” of the minor children to plaintiff when they were originally in her custody. However, citing the history of interaction following the award of physical custody to plaintiff and the necessity of a show cause hearing resulting in finding plaintiff in contempt of court for repeated violation of parenting time orders, the trial court emphasized that plaintiff was

found to have “demonstrated a clear pattern of denying parenting time . . . despite the negative impact that this has on the children.” In addition, the trial court observed that plaintiff had “continued to interfere” with defendant’s parenting time with the minor children through scheduling their participation in various activities and camps during defendant’s “scheduled weekends” without consultation or agreement beforehand. The trial court also determined that plaintiff was unwilling to promote the relationship between defendant and the minor children by systematically denying her access to educational and health information and appointments or activities, precluding her participation in meaningful aspects of the children’s lives. As such, the

trial court ruled that this factor strongly favored defendant and would be given “significant weight” in the overall balancing of the best interest factors in evaluating the modification of custody.[1]



MOM WINS AND GETS CUSTODY BACK



The court concluded the trial court's decision was based on clear and convincing evidence the change in custody would facilitate an ongoing relationship between the children and both parents, and was in the children's best interests. Affirmed. [1]



Posted here 4/29/10 by



Terry R. Bankert

Flint Divorce Attorney

http://attorneybankert.com





[1]

Court: Michigan Court of Appeals (Unpublished, 04/20/2010)

Case Name: G v. G, e-Journal Number: 45601, No. 293817 Wayne Circuit Court Family Division Michigan, LC No. 06-605226-DM

[2]

http://www.nydailynews.com/gossip/2010/04/28/2010-04-28_jon_gosselin_drops_custody_lawsuit_against_exwife_kate_couple_ordered_to_take_pa.html

[3]

http://www.fox23news.com/news/local/story/Father-and-son-reunited-after-custody-battle/m6JPjB8Wg06hNjZcoATQyA.cspx

[4]

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/entertainment/hollywood/news-interviews/Sandra-will-not-battle-for-Jesses-kids-/articleshow/5868052.cms

Should you be able to get a divorce on the day you file?

Flint Divorce Lawyer Terry Bankert shares his opinion on the waiting period in divorce.

These waiting periods are thought to be for the children.

The underlying theory is that waiting gives children the time to adjust to the split of their parents. It gives the parents time to reconcile before divorce.

A long waiting period also works to exclude men from joint custody.

Most men move from the marital home and into inexpensive small apartments. They have been a partner in raising the children but usually end up with a reduced role during the waiting period after a temporary orders have been made. At the time of trial they no longer have a joint custody environment and have effectively lost their right to joint physical and legal custody of their children. What do you think the waiting period between application and granting of divorce should be?

GOVERNMENT SHOULD STAY OUT OF PEOPLES LIVES.

Divorce in itself is a social issue which should not be of concern to the government, other than the need to determine property interests and decide child custody issues, which are legitimate legal concerns.[3]

Divorce Waiting Period

Many states have divorce waiting periods .WHEN YOU FILE FOR DIVORCE make sure what the waiting period is. These Divorce waiting periods vary from state to state, ranging from a month to six months to even a year or more, if certain divorce issues haven't been resolved. Many states will consider extending divorce waiting periods, especially for couples with children. Some think that shorter divorce waiting periods lead to higher divorce rates.[8]

What's the Waiting Period to File for Divorce in Your State?

Many states require a period of separation before divorce when fault is alleged,. But most states have no requirement about spouses being separated for any period of time prior to filing for A NO FAULT DIVORCE. Did you know that some states require a period of separation before filing for divorce Other states require a separation prior to issuing a divorce decree. see generally [8]


WAITING PERIOD IN DIVORCE


A divorce judgment generally may not be entered until after the expiration of a waiting period: 60 days after the complaint was filed for a divorce without children and six months when minor children are involved (unless the court finds extenuating circumstances that necessitate shortening the six-month period). MCL 552.9f; MCR 3.210(A).


The willingness of the trial courts to waive the six-month waiting period varies widely among the circuits and among judges within a circuit.


MCL 552.9f also provides that a party may perpetuate testimony before the waiting period has expired. See also MCR 3.210(A)(3). A plaintiff who will not be in the local area after the waiting period may file a motion for perpetuation of testimony. Testimony is taken in open court, transcribed by the court reporter, and placed in the court file. At the hearing, the court considers the perpetuated testimony in determining the grounds for entry of the divorce judgment. Alexander v Alexander, 103 Mich App 263, 303 NW2d 202 (1981).


COULD A LONGER WAITING PERIOD SAVE THE MARRIAGE OF SANDRA BULLOCK AND JESSE JAMES BECAUSE OF HIS SEX ADDICTION?

Sandra Bullock's love rat hubby Jesse James will spend April in rehab, his publicist said. [4]


SHOULD THE WAITING PERIOD BE SHORTNED WHEN THERE IS DOMESTIC VIOLENCE?

STACEY DASH: The 44-year-old actress split from her husband of three years, Emmanuel Xuereb, in January and a judge granted her a protection order when she filed legal papers to make the split official.[5]

WHAT AFFECT DOES THE WAITING PERIOD FOR THE RICH HAVE CONSIDERING THE COMPLEXITY OF THEIR PROPERTY DIVISION?

Casino maestro Steve Wynn and his now-ex-wife, Elaine Wynn, officially ended their marriage late last year with a settlement that has been sealed at her request. Yet the question has been raised in the nation's gossip columns and in the parlors around Vegas: Was this split the costliest on record? "I would say so," Wynn, 68, …Wynn's relationship with Hissom became public in January 2009. The Wynns filed for divorce two months later. A judge accepted a proposed settlement in November…..Elaine Wynn received her 11,076,709 shares of stock in January, when it was worth $741 million. A recent stock run-up now puts the value of that stake at $955 million.[6]

WHAT IMPACT WILL A WAITING PERIOD HAVE ON THE VERY PUBLIC TIGER AND ELIN WOODS SPLIT?


"Elin thinks if Tiger rushed his golf comeback then all he was interested in was getting back to where he was and she doesn't want to go back to where they were."There were so many other women, so many years of betrayal, of Tiger living a lie. Elin has to learn to trust him again and that is not happening."In fact, his return to golf has made her trust him less," the source revealed.[7]



ARIZONA FAILS IN ATTEMPt TO MAKE IT HARDER TO GET A DIVORCE

It appears that an ill-conceived bill to extend the waiting time before a divorce is finalized in Arizona has been rejected by the Legislature.[1]

That's good. We hope House Bill 2650 is not resurrected during the last, chaotic days of this legislative session.[1]


NO-FAULT DIVORCE

In Arizona, which is a "no- fault" divorce state, one party needs only to assert in a court petition that the marriage is "irretrievably broken." After a 60-day wait, a judge can formally grant a divorce.[1]


ARIZONA FAILS IN ATTEMPT

Lawmakers rejected a bill that would have extended that wait to 180 days. When that failed, Rep. Nancy Barto, R-Phoenix, next tried a proposal that would have allowed one party to demand that the divorce be delayed for six months.[1]


Opponents say a longer waiting period extends uncertainties for children and could impose dangerous stresses on couples.[2]


STATE POLICY SHOULD BE TO ENCOURAGE MARRAIGE

Barto argued that the change was needed because "homes that break up cost the state and should be the policy of our state to encourage families to stay together," Howard Fischer of Capitol Media Services reported in the Star.[1]

LONGER WAITING PERIOD DOES NOT SAVE MARRAIGE

That argument makes little sense to us. There's no evidence that a longer waiting period would reduce the number of divorces.[1]

DO MOST FAMILIES TRY COUNSELING FIRST

As we noted in a February editorial, Colleen McNally, the presiding family court judge for Maricopa County, testified to a House committee that by the time many couples file for divorce, they've already tried counseling.[1]

TIME TO GET DIVORCE SHOULD BE SHORTNED

In an earlier story reported by Fischer in the Star, McNally said judges would like to see the time to make a divorce final shortened, not lengthened.[1]

PEOPLE DO NOT SEEK A DIVORCE IN HASTE

"We don't seem to see people coming to court who are hastily seeking to dissolve their marriages," McNally said.[1]

GOVERNMENT INTRUSION IN TO PEOPLES LIVES

Fischer reported that the bill could still be revived using parliamentary maneuvers.

Lawmakers should let it die a quiet death. We think it would perpetrate a new, inappropriate government intrusion into the private lives of Arizonans.[1]


A SHORT WAITING PERIOD IS BEST


But if married couples want to split, and the necessary legal issues have been addressed, then the state should keep its nose out of it. It is something individuals should decide for themselves, and the court system should expedite the process as much as possible, not drag it out.[3]

Posted here by
Terry Bankert
http://www.attorneybankert.com/
Find your court house in Michgian
http://www.dumpmyspouse.com/


See


[1]

http://azstarnet.com/news/opinion/editorial/article_8e801e6b-322a-5c89-b0f7-f95afcb50210.html


[2]

http://www.kswt.com/Global/story.asp?S=12280057


[3]

http://www.yumasun.com/opinion/divorce-57570-delay-legislation.html


[4]

http://www.dnaindia.com/entertainment/report_jesse-james-to-spend-april-in-rehabilitation_1369695


[5]

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/dailydish/detail?entry_id=60988


[6]

http://www.aolnews.com/weird-news/article/steve-wynn-calls-his-divorce-most-expensive-ever/19433852




[7]

http://news.oneindia.in/2010/04/09/tigerwoods-relationship-with-wife-gettingworse.html




[8]

http://www.totaldivorce.com/process/requirements/waiting-period.aspx

Michigan Legal Separation

If they lived in Michigan an option for Jesse James , Sandra Bullock would be legal Separation

Flint Divorce Lawyer Terry Bankert shares his thoughts On Legal Separation.

A Married Couple in Flint and through out Michigan may request separate maintenance because the parties have a religious objection to divorce, or want to stay married for other reasons. Some times it allows for a cooling off period while protecting both parties. As a Flint Divorce Attorney my observation is that a separate maintenance may in some Flint Divorce cases may have saved the marriage.
　
　
On March 7, Sandra Bullock and Jesse James walked the red carpet arm in arm before Bullock accepted the Best Actress Oscar at the ceremony for her work in "The Blind Side." That next week, she reportedly moved out of the couple's home. [1] If they were residents of Michigan several options would be available. Legal Separation would be one.
　
Separate Maintenance

Married persons may request separate maintenance because the parties have a religious objection to divorce, or want to stay married for other reasons. Separate maintenance may allow both parties to have continued health care coverage, but some employers and heath insurance providers treat an action for separate maintenance as a triggering event disqualifying a nonemployee spouse from continued health insurance coverage. This is not uniformly applied by either employers or health insurance providers.

How do you get a separate maintenance? It is filed in the same manner and on the same grounds as a divorce MCL 552.7. First the plaintiff or the defendant must have resided in the state for at least 180 days and in the county of filing for at least 10 days immediately preceding the filing of the complaint MCL 552.7(1), 9(1).

This criteria must be met. Both of these residency requirements are jurisdictional and must be met on the date of filing. If the requirements are not met, the action may be dismissed or the judgment set aside. Lewis v Lewis, 153 Mich App164, 395 NW2d 44 (1986) (circuit court lacks jurisdiction in separate maintenance action if neither party met residency requirement before filing).

ARE YOU DIVORCED? When the matter is concluded, the parties are still technically married, but the marital property may be divided, MCL 552.19, and the court may order support for a spouse who requires it MCL 552.23 (1).A Separate Maintenance action will result in a divorce judgment if the defendant files a counterclaim for divorce and the statutory grounds are established MCL 552.7 (4) (b).

Questions? Contact information below.

Posted here by
Terry Bankert
Flint Michigan Divorce Lawyer
http://www.dumpmyspouse.com/

[1]
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/03/19/entertainment/main6315401.shtml

Link to this article
http://terrybankert.blogspot.com/2010/03/michigan-legal-separation.html