Interstate issues help/opinions???

[BL]

I would hope you or your Lawyer Could Argue , under the UCCJA :

4 ) discourage continued controversies over Child Custody ........

6 ) avoid re-litigation of Custody decisions of other States in so far as feasible ,

7 ) facilitate the enforcement of Custody decrees of other States , Etc.

 

[NVdad]

re: discourage continued controversies over Child Custody ........

4 ) discourage continued controversies over Child Custody ........

6 ) avoid re-litigation of Custody decisions of other States in so far as feasible ,

7 ) facilitate the enforcement of Custody decrees of other States , Etc.



These have been my objective for as long as I have had my daughter... Do you think the fact that this was premeditated on her part (this attempt to gain custody) enters into this, showing bad faith?

 

[LdiJ]

4 ) discourage continued controversies over Child Custody ........

6 ) avoid re-litigation of Custody decisions of other States in so far as feasible ,

7 ) facilitate the enforcement of Custody decrees of other States , Etc.



These have been my objective for as long as I have had my daughter... Do you think the fact that this was premeditated on her part (this attempt to gain custody) enters into this, showing bad faith?

Honestly, no. Parents have the right to petition for custody changes, and the right to petition to amend or overturn previous agreements. That is what I meant when I said that custody is "fluid". You are looking at this more in the terms of a "contract"...and how contracts are binding. However, since children are not comodities, and their best interest can change over time, matters regarding children cannot be treated in the same manner as a business contract.

Any time a parent petitions for custody its premeditated....and to be quite honest, this is something that a judge would be surprized if mom didn't do, after having custody for a year.

 

[NVdad]

What I mean, is... AND THANK YOU ALL.

What I mean is, that this was a PLOT from the very beginning, to gain custody, to enter into an agreement which she had no intention of keeping. It just seems very wrong that someone who has done something good for his kid, unselfish and with the best intentions, could be punished like this.

I would also like to THANK everyone for their opinions and insights into this matter. You've all been very helpful no matter your point of view is.

 

[LdiJ]

What I mean is, that this was a PLOT from the very beginning, to gain custody, to enter into an agreement which she had no intention of keeping. It just seems very wrong that someone who has done something good for his kid, unselfish and with the best intentions, could be punished like this.

I would also like to THANK everyone for their opinions and insights into this matter. You've all been very helpful no matter your point of view is.

I guess what I was trying to say is that a judge would almost expect that it was a plot since day one. The judge would almost expect that mom had every intention of trying to keep custody. Because that is often the case. Many parents (male or female) would do anything and everything that they could to keep custody.

When you said that you had agreed for mom to have custody for one year, I almost didn't have to read further. I knew what was coming next.

 

[BL]

I would think that the Court could/would Look back on what the Orders were BEFORE this subsequent agreement , and put 2 and 2 together .

I would not think a competent Judge would over look them .

Also, If this ends up in appeals , the appellate Court should certainly see the Contempts , and rule favorably for you .

In the end , who knows , you might get the CS arrears reinstated too .

 

[NVdad]

Yea...

I do have a feeling this may end up in appeals. And I don't care about the support, she tried to collect fraudulently, (by submitting an old divorce decree) and has been denied. I wonder, will she face any criminal charges for that? Or will they just say, "Don't do that again"

And of course, I do sympathize with her mother. I am not heartless. That is how I wound up in this situation, having a heart. But she moved away FIRST. It was her choice, not mine. Sad thing is, if her mother behaved for this year, she and I could have gotten along famously. We could have done this again. I set out a court order with good terms for all involved. Everybody won... If only she would have talked to me and said, "I'm sending her back, can we do this again?". Now this is eating up lots of money and my insides. I can't even talk to ker without her getting a defiant attitude so now I can only talk to her through the courts (She dared me to get a court order, says what my daughter or I want, or what we agreed, doesn't matter, etc) She treats the kid like property.

I talked to our daughter today, she has always Known this was a one year visit. She is expecting to be here soon. Poor kid.

Funny how laws (UCCJEA) designed to protect only confuses this matter.

 

[NVdad]

Section 208 (a), unjustifiable conduct

SECTION 208. JURISDICTION DECLINED BY REASON OF CONDUCT.
(a) Except as otherwise provided in Section 204 [or by other law of this
State], if a court of this State has jurisdiction under this [Act] because a person seeking to invoke its jurisdiction has engaged in unjustifiable conduct, the court shall decline to exercise its jurisdiction

What is considered "unjustifiable conduct?"