"Custody hearing"

[Intact family]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Maryland

My wife and I are being sued by her mother for GPV and a custody hearing has been scheduled for September. What's the purpose of it and what goes on at these hearings? Just to be clear, she wants court ordered, unsupervised visitation with our kids while we are strongly against it. Thank you.

 

[Isis1]

Does grandma have any type of visitation? How often does she see the grandchild? On what basis is grandma stating the children would be harmed if she did not have visitation?

 

[LdiJ]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Maryland

My wife and I are being sued by her mother for GPV and a custody hearing has been scheduled for September. What's the purpose of it and what goes on at these hearings? Just to be clear, she wants court ordered, unsupervised visitation with our kids while we are strongly against it. Thank you.

Most likely that is the main hearing where you will each make your case and present your arguments.

 

[Intact family]

Does grandma have any type of visitation? How often does she see the grandchild? On what basis is grandma stating the children would be harmed if she did not have visitation?

Isis1,

I've explained the situation on prior threads but just in a nutshell, we are the married, biological parents of all three children. Our kids have always lived with us and only us. Our two oldest children spent one night at Grandma's house in their entire lives, the youngest one never. Grandma was never a regular babysitter or any type of caregiver. The vast majority of her visits occurred in the presence of either my wife or both of us. She never provided any financial support and was never any type of "parent figure" in their lives. She has not seen the kids since last August.

She is claiming that the prior "steady and stable" relationship she had with the kids has been severed and therefore the kids are being "harmed." Her case is one of the weakest I have read about in not just Maryland but in any state. There is no divorce, no out of wedlock birth, no stepparent, no incarceration, no loss of parental rights, etc. Most GP's wouldn't even bother to bring a suit against an intact family because the chances of winning are so remote. The Maryland court of special appeals just released a GPV opinion a few weeks ago which should make Grandma and her lawyer shudder with fear. In that case, the GP's provided free daycare for a number of years and also let the grandkids sleep over at their house on a weekly basis. The circuit court granted visitation but the COSA reversed because the GP's never provided any evidence that the kids had suffered harm. The circuit court just assumed that they would based on the prior bond. Her relationship with our kids was much less involved than the case I just described and if the GP's lost there than my MIL will definitely lose here. Our kids are happy, healthy and well adjusted. Her only hope is to get a corrupt and weak judge who will rule on personal sympathy and not the law.

 

[Iwant2bfree]

I am in CA and am going thru the same thing.

I have had 3 suits filed against me/my children. One child is from a divorce and the other is not.

The case(s) for the child in the married home was JUST DISMISSED on Monday . Both my Mother and my Father in Law filed suits against Us. We are in the same situation as you... she has only been with Grandma on one occassion overnight, other then that they really have had little to no involvement in her life.

The Judge flat out said since she is in an intact family that they have NO rights. Be sure to read what the GV code is for your State. In our state there are 4 criterias and we fit NONE of them so it was dismissed.

Best of luck to you. Im sorry you are even going thru this. Its incredibly stressfull.

 

[Intact family]

I am in CA and am going thru the same thing.

I have had 3 suits filed against me/my children. One child is from a divorce and the other is not.

The case(s) for the child in the married home was JUST DISMISSED on Monday . Both my Mother and my Father in Law filed suits against Us. We are in the same situation as you... she has only been with Grandma on one occassion overnight, other then that they really have had little to no involvement in her life.

The Judge flat out said since she is in an intact family that they have NO rights. Be sure to read what the GV code is for your State. In our state there are 4 criterias and we fit NONE of them so it was dismissed.

Best of luck to you. Im sorry you are even going thru this. Its incredibly stressfull.

Yes, one suit is stressful enough but three??? I really feel for you and I hope you win everything. I wish Maryland would make it a requirement that GP's do not have standing to sue against intact families. Maybe after this is over I'll see if I can lobby the legislature, although I have a feeling that will be an uphill battle. Best of luck to you! Keep us posted.

 

[stealth2]

Isis1,

I've explained the situation on prior threads

Which is why it's generally better to consolidate your posts into one thread.

 

[Intact family]

First, I called the court a while back and told them that this is a visitation issue with a third party grandparent, not a custody case. They have correctly labeled the upcoming hearing as "visitation" now instead of custody.

A few months ago Grandma and her attorney hired an "expert witness" to write a letter for them saying that the absence of visitation with grandma "may" be harmful to the children. In turn, we hired our own psychologist who interviewed our kids and said they are well adjusted. I just looked up our case file online tonight and now grandma has filed a new motion, one for their expert witness to interview our children with exhibits. I do not know what exhibits they are referring to.

We are a married, intact family. What are the chances the court will actually grant this motion to grandma, a disgruntled third party??

 

[liandrajade]

First, I called the court a while back and told them that this is a visitation issue with a third party grandparent, not a custody case. They have correctly labeled the upcoming hearing as "visitation" now instead of custody.

A few months ago Grandma and her attorney hired an "expert witness" to write a letter for them saying that the absence of visitation with grandma "may" be harmful to the children. In turn, we hired our own psychologist who interviewed our kids and said they are well adjusted. I just looked up our case file online tonight and now grandma has filed a new motion, one for their expert witness to interview our children with exhibits. I do not know what exhibits they are referring to.

We are a married, intact family. What are the chances the court will actually grant this motion to grandma, a disgruntled third party??

Honestly, who knows. It all depends on whether or not her attorney can make a compelling argument as to the validity of their motion and getting the judge to allow it.

So where is everything now? What has happened up to this point?

 

[mistoffolees]

First, I called the court a while back and told them that this is a visitation issue with a third party grandparent, not a custody case. They have correctly labeled the upcoming hearing as "visitation" now instead of custody.

A few months ago Grandma and her attorney hired an "expert witness" to write a letter for them saying that the absence of visitation with grandma "may" be harmful to the children. In turn, we hired our own psychologist who interviewed our kids and said they are well adjusted. I just looked up our case file online tonight and now grandma has filed a new motion, one for their expert witness to interview our children with exhibits. I do not know what exhibits they are referring to.

We are a married, intact family. What are the chances the court will actually grant this motion to grandma, a disgruntled third party??

In order to get that, the court will have to determine that grandparents have standing to sue and also that there is reason to believe that their case has merit. It's not going to be a slam dunk, but it could happen. Make sure you have a good attorney.

 

[Intact family]

Honestly, who knows. It all depends on whether or not her attorney can make a compelling argument as to the validity of their motion and getting the judge to allow it.

So where is everything now? What has happened up to this point?

We've had one hearing so far and that was the motion to dismiss, which was denied. The next hearing will be in front of a master and that is scheduled one month from now. In Maryland GP's must show a threshold of either parental unfitness or exceptional circumstances before looking at the best interest of the child. That is a high hurdle for GP's. The problem in Maryland is that a grandparent can bring suit against fit parents no matter how frivilous or meritless so parents are forced to spend tens of thousands of dollars.

My kids are doing well in school, have no disciplinary problems, no behavioral problems and interact well with their friends and neighbors as always. Their whole intent behind their motion to interview our kids is to try and isolate them and then influence their responses to what they want to hear, and then say to the court "see your honor, this shows they're being harmed." The circuit courts in MD are very sympathetic towards GP's and have been overturned by the appellate courts several times in the last few years. So, you're right, it does depend on the judge. It's all just so unnecessary as this is not a custody case between parents but two fit parents against a third party. Unfortunately the courts seem to forget that.

 

[liandrajade]

Just a word of caution, do not make the mistake I did assuming the law was completely on my side. My child's grandmother used the fact that she lived with me and my child as her reason or standing to sue and it was permitted..when I thought it wouldn't count.

If I had to go back and do things again, yes I most certainly would have had a lawyer but it was not feasible. And yes I did represent myself sucessfully, but let's be realistic, it was a very very very lucky exception to the rule.

The fact that they denied your motion to dismiss and your case supposedly has so many facts and reasons why it LEGALLY should have been dismissed would make me be just a bit more cautious.

Not saying you are going to have a problem but just be vigiliant is all. Good Luck

 

[LdiJ]

Just a word of caution, do not make the mistake I did assuming the law was completely on my side. My child's grandmother used the fact that she lived with me and my child as her reason or standing to sue and it was permitted..when I thought it wouldn't count.

If I had to go back and do things again, yes I most certainly would have had a lawyer but it was not feasible. And yes I did represent myself sucessfully, but let's be realistic, it was a very very very lucky exception to the rule.

The fact that they denied your motion to dismiss and your case supposedly has so many facts and reasons why it LEGALLY should have been dismissed would make me be just a bit more cautious.

Not saying you are going to have a problem but just be vigiliant is all. Good Luck

liandrajade, you are in NY, which is notorius for being gp friendly.

The OP is in Maryland, which has solid case law that helps protect intact families.

You are comparing apples to oranges in this instance.

 

[liandrajade]

liandrajade, you are in NY, which is notorius for being gp friendly.

The OP is in Maryland, which has solid case law that helps protect intact families.

You are comparing apples to oranges in this instance.

While I am inclined to agree in theory, I say never assume anything ever, regardless of the case law. I am just saying be cautiously optimistic is all until the case is determined and behind them, I would just be on my toes and ready for anything.

 

[Proserpina]

While I am inclined to agree in theory, I say never assume anything ever, regardless of the case law. I am just saying be cautiously optimistic is all until the case is determined and behind them, I would just be on my toes and ready for anything.

Seriously ...LdiJ is absolutely right.

Nobody is making any assumptions, but L is right when she says that there IS ample case law relevant to the OP's situation in Maryland.

Case law absolutely DOES matter. And should never be ignored, if only to provide a solid reference point.