Flint Divorce Lawyer discusses several Divorce Issues:
The Law of CHILD CUSTODY IN THE NEWS AND A RECENT OPINION OF THE MICHIGAN APPELLATE COURT
We know Child Custody battles are common place. The most known are media celebrities. If it can happen to them it can happen to you.
RECENTLY JON GOSSLIN STOPS CUSTODY BATTLE WITH KATE GOSSELIN
WE READ IN TMZ.com the octodad is planning to drop his custody and child support lawsuit against ex Kate Gosselin.[2]
GOSSLIN 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 GOSSLIN 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]
MONEY WISE 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]
WITHOUT LEGAL RIGHTS SANDRA BULLOCK TO NOT SEEK CUSTODY OF THE CHILDREN OF JESSE JAMES
AWARD WINNING 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
THE CHILD WAS BORN OUT OF WEDLOCK… 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 CUSTODY CHANGED turned in November of 2009 and the court awarded Rodriguez full custody. [[3]
As for TINA 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
Jessie James Sandra Bullock divorce and adoption.
Our lives are a bumpy road with happiness being fleeting. Why do we do what we do on a give day. Sandra Bullock and Jessie James spent several years qualifying for adoption of a baby, out of site of the press. I bet they gave out a Yahoo when they were approved.
The baby adopted in January is African American. Bullock then wins award for nurturing another African American child in a movie. She found her base, Jessie James found several of his.
But the aftermath and their conduct Class in discretion of her part and class of responsibility acceptance on his part show them both to be greater than the events of scandal we all following with shallow motive.
I view them both as larger now. We can all take lesson on their role model of how to conduct oneself in a divorce. Children and privacy first.
FILING FOR DIVORCE
US Oscar- winning actor Sandra Bullock has filed for divorce to end her five-year marriage to Jesse James, she told People magazine in remarks published on its website yesterday.[1]
In Michigan the requirements of a divorce petition include.
Required provisions for divorce judgments.
All divorce judgments.
A determination of each party’s rights in insurance on the life of the other party.
A release of dower rights.
A determination of each party’s rights in pension, annuity, or retirement benefits; contributions to a pension, annuity, or retirement plan; and contingent rights in unvested benefits.
The parties’ rights in property.
A provision granting, reserving, or denying spousal support.
If spousal support is no modifiable, a provision to that effect.
Divorces with minor children—additional required provisions.
A prohibition against moving the children’s residence outside Michigan or, in the case of a joint custody arrangement, a relocation agreement or mandated language prohibiting moving the children’s residence more than 100 miles away.
A requirement that the custodial parent promptly notify the Friend of the Court in writing of any change of the children’s address.
A statement by the court declaring the children’s inherent rights and establishing the rights and duties as to the children’s custody, support, and parenting time.
CHANGE IS SCARY
The Oscar-winning actress said in an interview published on People magazine's website that she had filed for divorce from Jesse James: "I'm sad and I am scared," she said[2]
ADOPTION AND DIVORCE
Sandra Bullock admitted yesterday that she and her now-estranged husband adopted a baby boy three months before she found out he was cheating on her.[2] The Child is 3½-month-old Louis Bardo Bullock, and she now planned to raise him as a single mother.[1]
The surprise, reported by People magazine, is the existence of an adoption in process. Bullock and James, 41, had planned to adopt Louis, a 3-month-old African-American baby from New Orleans. Bullock now plans to complete the adoption as a single parent, according to People.[3]
THE COUPLE TOOK HOME THE BABY IN JANURARY
Bullock and James took baby Louis Bardo Bullock home in January. [2]
JESSIE MANS UP
James, a custom motorcycle manufacturer and reality TV star, said last month that he took full responsibility for his actions, although he did not comment on allegations of an affair with a California tattoo model.[1]
DIVORCE DOES NOT HAVE TO STOP LOVE
Of her relationship with James's three children, Bullock said: "I don't want to know what life is like without those kids." [2]
JESSIE WILL BE INVITED TO BE PART OF THE BABYS LIFE
Looking ahead to life without James, Bullock said, "I really don't know how our paths will intersect in the future, but the father I have known Jesse to be with all the kids is one that I hope Louis can experience one day, no matter how Jesse and I go on with our lives." [2]
PROPERTY DIVISION
No protective order has been filed and the division of property, according to the petition, will focus on community ownership. Bullock, who holds property in several states and is perhaps Hollywood's most bankable female star, also owns several Austin businesses, including Bess Bistro on Pecan and Walton's Fancy and Staple. [3]
In Michigan In general, property and debts accumulated through the direct or indirect efforts of the parties during the marriage are marital. Neither party is inherently entitled to a greater share of the marital assets or responsible for a greater share of the marital debts. Separate property should be awarded to the owner spouse. These presumptions may be rebutted.
Mandatory Judgment Provisions
Property division must be discussed in the judgment of divorce in a separate paragraph prefaced by an appropriate heading. MCR 3.211(A). The judgment must address these property interests:
Property division. A division of the real and personal property brought to and acquired during the marriage as well as the parties’ debts. MCL 552.19, .23, .101, .103, .401; MCR 3.211(B)(3); Yeo v Yeo, 214 Mich App 598, 543 NW2d 62 (1995).
Insurance. A statement confirming that the divorce judgment terminates each spouse’s interest as a beneficiary in life insurance on the other spouse’s life or providing otherwise. MCL 552.101(2)–(3); MCR 3.211(B)(1).
Dower. A statement that the divorce judgment satisfies the wife’s dower claims in the husband’s property. MCL 552.101(1); MCR 3.211(B)(1).
Pension, annuity, and retirement benefits. A determination of the rights of both spouses in pension, annuity, or retirement benefits. MCL 552.101(4); MCR 3.211(B)(2).
A consent judgment of divorce provision releasing each party’s rights to the life insurance proceeds of the other party waives a party’s right to a late former spouse’s life insurance proceeds. Sweebe v Sweebe, 474 Mich 151, 712 NW2d 708 (2006); MacInnes v MacInnes, 260 Mich App 280, 677 NW2d 889 (2004).
A divorce or an annulment revokes a will provision naming the former spouse as a beneficiary unless the will specifically provides otherwise. MCL 700.2806–.2809.
JURISDICTION
The petition says she has lived in Texas for at least the previous six months and has been a resident of Travis County for at least 90 days. During much of that time, Bullock remained behind the walls of her Hollywood Hills residence, dodging a battery of paparazzi.[3]
[1]
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/world/2010/0429/1224269287258.html
[2]
http://www.timeslive.co.za/entertainment/article424118.ece/Single-parent-Bullock-loving-it
[3]
http://www.straitstimes.com/BreakingNews/Lifestyle/Story/STIStory_520444.html
DID THE AFFAIR COST HIM CONTRACTS? WILL TIKI BARBERS CHILD SUPPORT CALCULATIONS BE BASED ON HIS CONTRACT LEVEL OF INCOME? YES!
Terry Bankert Flint Divorce Lawyer comments on how Tiki Barber was thrown for a loss. If this can happen to a celebrity couple it could happen to your friends , family or you. What if Tiki Barber and Ginny Barber lived in Michigan ?
TIKI HAS A GIRL FRIEND , WIFE HAS UNBORN TWINS!WHY FILE FOR DIVORCE?
TMZ.com reported today that former NFL star Tiki Barber was shocked to learn his wife Ginny had filed for divorce. A source told TMZ that Barber had been under the impression that neither he nor his wife "would file divorce papers until after the babies were born."[3]
ROMANTIC INTEREST OUTSIDE MARRAIGE
Tiki Barber have you no shame or any concern at all for your estranged wife of 11 years, who used to be your best friend and biggest supporter? Obviously not. You were spotted all over New York City, reports the New York Post, with 23 year-old Traci Lynn Johnson, the former college student turned NBC intern who you preferred over your wife, two little boys and the twins on the way.[1]
HE'S GOT THE BALL, ....AND FUMBLED!
Tiki Barber fumbled his good guy rep when he left his pregnant wife for a blonde hottie, but he's still got his big bucks job on the today show.[2]
DOES MALE CELEBRITY NOW MEAN HE IS PHILANDERING?
The Barbers join a long list of celebrity marriages recently marred by philandering husbands. While Tiki has sort of slid under the radar due to the hype surrounding a few higher profile relationships (ahem, Tiger Woods Elign Woods and Jesse James ( Sandra Bullock), his circumstance is one of the more offensive given that he was cheating on his wife of 11 years while she was pregnant with twins! [3]
DIVORCE SETTLEMENT NEGOTIATIONS
Not only that, you’ve been lowballing Ginny in out-of-court negotiations over financial support, a family friend told the NYPost. ” Tiki refused to give her anything close to what she needs,” the friend told the paper. Guess it’s more important to buy expensive gifts, clothing and take her out to dinner, than take care of sons AJ, 7, Chasen, 6 and your new babies, Tiki. No wonder our Hollywoodlife.com readers voted you THE WORST Dad of 2010 by a wide margin with 55 per cent of the vote. You easily beat out Jon Gosselin and Tiger Woods.[1]
WHY WOULD HE BE SUPRIZED? LOSS OF CONTROL?
Why Barber is surprised by this news is very unclear. His wife, Ginny, is currently 8 months pregnant with twins, and they have been separated for weeks since news of Barber's infidelity (with a much younger woman) surfaced.[3]
ADULTRY BASIS OF MARITAL BREAKDOWN
The divorce papers were filed in the Manhattan Supreme Court Apr. 26 citing “adultery.” Tiki surprised his wife with news about his affair when he told her he was moving out last fall and into a midtown lovenest. [1]
SACKED
"Tiki is a contributor to the 'Today' show," an NBC news spokeswoman told The Daily News on Tuesday, refuting reports that Barber has been sacked by 30 Rock.
SUPRIZED BY GIRL FRIEND
Until, he dropped that bomb on pregnant Ginny, the former football star, who had spoken out about his own father’s philandering, had never dropped a hint to Ginny, that he was unhappy with their marriage, a source told Hollywoodlife.com.[1]
LOST HIS BIGGEST GIG
Barber, 35, also recently lost his gig on NBC's weekly Sunday night football telecast. The network opted not to renew Barber's contract after last season.
TO GIG OR TO SHACK
Barber's ouster from that show appeared to coincide with reports that he'd shacked up with 23-year-old former NBC intern Traci Lynn Johnson.[2]
DOMESTIC ISSUES COST HUSBAND CONRACTS
It’s not surprising that NBC has suspended Tiki from his two jobs as a Sports and Today show correspondent after news about his scandalous behavior broke. Reports are surfacing that the Today show has fired Tiki but NBC and Tiki both will not comment.[1]
WHAT INCOME WILL TIKIS CHILD SUPPORT BE BASED UPON.
A recent Michigan Court of Appeals case may give some guidance.
Michigan Court of Appeals (Unpublished 4-20-2010),Case Name: T v. T Genesee County 04-252661-DM on the date of this writing 4/28/10 this case was sealed from the public. There appears to be a PPO with the same parties Judge Kay Behm 03-249987-DC
e-Journal Number: 45575,Judge(s): Per Curiam - Jansen, Cavanagh, and K.F. Kelly
This case looked at Child support; Whether the trial court properly imputed income to plaintiff for the purpose of calculating child support; Rohloff v. Rohloff; Olson v. Olson; 2008 Michigan Child Support Formula (MCSF) Manual 2.01
WILL THE COURT DECIDE THAT TIKI HAS AN UNEXERCISED ABILITY TO EARN?
The Michigan Court of Appeals held the trial court did not abuse its discretion by adopting the referee's recommendation and imputing a $350,000 annual income to plaintiff for purposes of calculating child support where the evidence clearly showed he voluntarily reduced his income when he left the investment banking field and he had an unexercised ability to earn far more than he was presently earning. [SEE 04-252661-DM]
THE JUDGE HAS GREAT DISCRETION WITH YOUR LIFE IN DIVORCE
As to child support, both case law and the MCSF clearly grant the trial court discretion to impute additional, unearned income to a parent. The evidence showed plaintiff earned well over $600,000 in his last year as an investment banker, he had other substantial assets and investments, he continued to receive distributions from his former company (in which he owned equity), and a VE testified he had a current potential to earn at least $350,000 a year based on his experience and training in investment banking. [See Toal]
HE CAN MAKE MORE MONEY. JUST DO IT.
Tiki has the ability to earn more and his child support may be based upon that higher amount.
IN THE MICHIGAN CASE DAD SAID THE GENESEE COUNTY COURT GOT IT WRONG. THE COURT OF APPEALS SAID IT WAS DONE RIGHT. DAD PAYS MORE CHILD SUPPORT.
In Docket No. 291267, plaintiff argues that the circuit court erred by ordering him to pay
child support based on an imputed annual income of $350,000, rather than his true annual
income of $40,000.
DAD QUIT THE INVESTMENT JOB IN 2002
Specifically, plaintiff asserts that although he was formerly an investment banker, earning $350,000 or more per year, he had since given up his investment-banking career and become a school teacher, with a much more meager annual salary. He contends that the referee and circuit court erred (1) by imputing to him his former income as an investment banker rather than his present income as a teacher and coach, (2) by deviating from the Michigan Child Support Formula Manual (MCSF), and (3) by failing to articulate a sufficient reason for deviating from the MCSF. He points out that he had already switched from his former investment-banking career to his new teaching career at the time of the court’s child support determination, and asserts that the facts of this case did not support the court’s imputation of a $350,000 annual salary. Again, we disagree. [see 04-252661-DM]
THE JUDGE ADOPTED A REFEREE DECISION AND THAT IS OKAY
We cannot conclude that the circuit court abused its discretion by adopting the referee’s
recommendation that plaintiff should pay monthly child support based on an imputed annual income of $350,000. Both Michigan’s caselaw and the MCSF clearly grant the circuit court discretion to impute additional, unearned income to a parent. Stallworth, 275 Mich App at 285; 2008 MCSF 2.01(G). It is well settled that “when a party voluntarily reduces or eliminates income, and the . . . court concludes that the party has the ability to earn an income and pay child support, the court does not err in entering a support order based upon the unexercised ability to earn.” Olson v Olson, 189 Mich App 620, 622; 473 NW2d 772 (1991); see also Rohloff, 161 Mich App at 776. In particular, this Court has held that a circuit court may properly consider a party’s “income potential” when determining child support, id. at 770, and that a court does not abuse its discretion “by entering a child support order based upon the income [a party] received
before voluntarily leaving [his or her] employment,” id. at 776. [See 04-252661-DM]
HE MADE A LOT OF MONEY ONCE AND HE CAN DO IT AGAIN
In the case at bar, the evidence established that plaintiff had earned well over $600,000 in
his final year as an investment banker, that he had other substantial assets and investments, and that he continued to receive distributions from Chilmark, his former company in which he owned equity. Moreover, a vocational expert testified that plaintiff had a current potential to earn at least $350,000 per year, based on his training and experience in the field of investment banking. This Court must give due regard to the special opportunity of the referee and circuit court to weigh the testimony and judge the credibility of the witnesses. See In re Miller, 433 Mich 331, 337; 445 NW2d 161 (1989).
In short, the record in this matter adequately supported the referee’s
finding that plaintiff had other assets and investments in addition to his teaching salary, that he continued to receive distributions from his former company, and that he had the present capacity to earn $350,000 per year. Therefore, the circuit court did not abuse its discretion by adopting the referee’s recommendations on this issue and imputing to plaintiff an annual income of $350,000 for the purpose of calculating child support. [see 04-252661-DM]
THE FAMILY PLANNED TO MOVE HE QUIT A JOB THEY MOVED NOW HE PAYS ON WHAT HE IS NOT EARNING
Here, the evidence plainly established that plaintiff voluntarily reduced his income when
he relocated to Michigan and left the investment-banking industry. Moreover, credible
testimony showed that plaintiff had an unexercised ability to earn far more than he was presently earning as a teacher and coach. We simply cannot conclude that the circuit court deviated from the MCSF in this case. Quite the opposite, it appears to us that the court’s decision to impute income to plaintiff fully conformed to the MCSF’s mandates and guidelines, and we must therefore reject plaintiff’s claim to the contrary.2 See 2008 MCSF 2.01(G).[see 04-252661-DM]
PREGNANT WIFE LEFT HOME
Ginny is now home at her Upper East Side apartment and according to sources close to her, she’s very upset – no surprise.[1]
While Barber has been seen squiring Johnson around town and even took her to the Vancover Olympics, his soon-to-be ex-wife is pregnant with twins - and practically trapped in the marital bed.
"There have not been any complications, but her doctor said it's safer for her to stay in her home and stay in her bed," said a source close to the matter. "She's a small woman and she's very pregnant. Aside from visits to her doctor, she's confined to her apartment."[2]
“It’s been an emotional time for her,” says the source. “She is, of course, worried about the health of her unborn twins. It’s a lot to deal with and she is still being closely monitored by her doctors.”[1]
NO SYMPATHY FOR HUSBAND
We wish you well Ginny. Hopefully your louse of an ex will PAY bigtime![1]
See
[1]
http://www.hollywoodlife.com/2010/04/27/tiki-barber-wife-divorce-papers-traci-intern-mistress/
[2]
http://www.nydailynews.com/gossip/2010/04/27/2010-04-27_exgiant_tiki_barber_keeps_today_show_job_after_leaving_wife_for_23yearold_former.html
[3]
http://celebs.gather.com/viewArticle.action?articleId=281474978201800
FLINT DIVORCE LAWYER BANKERT COMMENTS ON KIM KARDASHIAN AND DOMESTIC VIOLENCE. POINT OF VIEW:IF THIS HAPPENED IN MICHIGAN.
4/26/2010
Terry Bankert a Flint Michigan Divorce Attorney comments on the following celebrity domestic relations and the issue implications from a Michigan Family Law view.
DOMESTIC VIOLENCE
New divorce court papers reveal Kim Kardashian's tumultuous relationship with ex-husband and music producer Damon Thomas, including the claim that Thomas punched Kardashian in the face and slammed her against the wall. [1]
DID YOU KNOW: Domestic violence happens when one household member , spouse , romantic interest or just room mate, chooses to use a pattern of physical assaults, threats of violence, and emotional abuse to maintain power and control over another.
Americas 50 states all have statutes authorizing courts to issue orders of protection to domestic violence victims.
NO POLICE CALLS, NO PPO
Why no police reports? Abject fear. "I thought about calling the police but was afraid and decided not to do so," Kardashian reported.[4]
In Michigan, a victim of domestic violence has the option of obtaining a personal protection order (PPO) to stop abusive behavior. PPOs may order a stop to specific actions, such as assaulting, attacking, beating, molesting, stalking, or wounding the petitioner. Additionaly, they may prohibit entering specific premises, usually including the petitioner’s home and place of employment. PPO’s may also prohibit the removal of minor children from the legal custodian, purchasing or possessing a firearm, and any other act that interferes with the petitioner’s personal liberty or that causes a reasonable fear of violence.
CONTROLLING
The papers also claim that Thomas gave her $3,650 to get liposuction, because he wanted her to be "perfect." [1]
During their divorce in 2004, Kim revealed in a sworn testimony that she was instructed to have liposuction, was treated like a maid and that music producer Damon had threatened to kill her.[3]
DOMINATING
"Damon decided what we would do and when we would do it. He was very much the 'King of the castle," Kardashian stated in the documents. [1]
THEATS OF VIOLENCE TO HER FAMILY
"He threatened to kill me, my family members and the guys that I am dating."
But that wasn't the only threat against her life, he repeated it at least 12 times. "At this point, I am frightened by the stories that are repeated to me." [2]
INDICATORS OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE
Domestic violence is a pattern of behavior whose purpose is to establish power and control over another person through fear and intimidation, often including the threat or use of violence. National Coalition Against Domestic Violence, at http://www.ncadv.org.
Domestic Violence is not limited to physical violence, abusers may use many forms of control against their partners, including
isolation from friends and family;
verbal abuse (belittlement, taunting);
intimidation (destroying property, abusing pets, displaying firearms);
economic abuse (controlling access to money, preventing or interfering with employment);
coercion (threatening to commit suicide or to report incidents to protective services);
use of the children (harassment during parenting time, threatening to kidnap the children);
sexual abuse; and
stalking.
SHOULD SHE HAVE SOUGHT A PPO?
Nobody has a right to hit you. But you have to act. A PPO is one way.
PPOs have two types that may be issued, depending on the relationship between the parties. A domestic relationship PPO enjoins certain assaultive and threatening behaviors when there is a domestic relationship between the parties. A domestic relationship exists if the parties are or have been married, have had a child in common, have lived together, or have dated.
WHAT BEHAVIOR CAN A PPO STOP OR AT LEAST GIVE THE POLICE A REASON TO ARREST?
What acts may a domestic relationship PPO restrict? Petitioners may request that the court prohibit respondents from the following:
(a) Entering onto premises.
(b) Assaulting, attacking, beating, molesting, or wounding a named individual.
(c) Threatening to kill or physically injure a named individual.
(d) Removing minor children from the individual having legal custody of the children.
(e) Purchasing or possessing a firearm.
(f) Interfering with petitioner’s efforts to remove petitioner’s children or personal property from premises that are solely owned or leased by respondent.
(g) Interfering with petitioner at petitioner’s place of employment or education or engaging in conduct that impairs petitioner’s employment or educational relationship or environment.
(h) Having access to information in records concerning a minor child of both petitioner and respondent that will inform respondent about the address or telephone number of petitioner and petitioner’s minor child or about petitioner’s employment address.
(i) Engaging in conduct that is prohibited under section 411h or 411i of the Michigan penal code (stalking).
(j) Any other specific act or conduct that imposes upon or interferes with personal liberty or that causes a reasonable apprehension of violence.
MCL 600.2950(1).
SHORT TERM MARRAIGE
The two were marred in Las Vegas when Kardashian was 19, Thomas 29. They divorced three years later.[1]
Posted here by
Terry Bankert
WWW.ATTORNEYBANKERT.COM
SEE
[1]
http://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/slideshow/survivors-abuse-7057338
[2]
http://www.hindustantimes.com/Kardashian-s-bad-marriage/H1-Article1-535226.aspx
[3]
http://www.mirror.co.uk/celebs/news/2010/04/24/court-papers-reveal-kim-kardashian-s-abusive-four-year-marriage-115875-22208181/
[4]
http://www.sheknows.com/articles/814830/kim-kardashian-papers-detail-abuse-at-hands-of-ex-1
It is a new day in American politics. As a body politic we now see the folly of lite weight political leaders , like George Bush, brought forth by the strength of a family name, nepotism, political dynasty, family machine politics, linage, blood line , having capital be it money or political debts and active participants in the politics of exclusion.
Enough is Enough.
We have with us a new group of political leaders that are technically competent, have the ability to get a job done, understand the politics of inclusion ,specifically President Obama nationally and State Representative Lee Gonzales Locally.
State Representative Lee Gonzales, now a candidate for the position of Genesee County Treasurer, recently has shown he is a “can do” elected official. He recently caused to be passed State Legislation regulating smoking in public places and texting while driving.
Lee Gonzales is currently in the race of his life for the position of County Treasurer against one such political dynasty, the Cherry Family of Montrose. He is in effect running against two opponents Deb Cherry a well liked State Senator and her revered brother Michigan Lt. Governor John Cherry.
This is not a critique of the Cherry family. If my sister were running for office I would be out there bloodying some noses. My voice today is raised to the voters. Think through your choices, weigh heavily your value for change. Democrats can elect the most competent. Democrats can make independent decisions. We listen to voices we trust but we can make our own decision.
We must demand a return to basics in American politics. Ask yourself these questions. What are the demands of the office sought. In the case of the Country Treasure to understand and be able to run the office, save the tax payers money, be a leader in all of the other statutorily imposed responsibilities like the Land Bank and be transparent and accountable to the you the citizens of Genesee County. Lee Gonzales is ready and able to shoulder these responsibilities now. The likeable State Senator Deb Cherry would have to throw herself into a year of on the job training to be ready, even with her brothers help.
This dye is cast for me. Read the literature, listen to the candidates. On election day ask your self which individual can protect your tax dollars today. The answer to the question should be your vote for Genesee County Treasurer. For me the choice is Lee Gonzales for Genesee County Treasurer.
Posted here by
Terry Bankert
Information of the texting bill at
http://www.mlive.com/news/flint/index.ssf/2010/04/state_rep_lee_gonzales_bill_to.html
DON’T TRUST GOVERNMENT? WHOHA GONNA CALLL!
The in-depth poll found Americans not only rejecting the idea of an activist government, but a growing number urging that its power be curtailed. The findings reinforce the anti-big government message of tea party rallies and suggest anew that incumbents, particularly Democrats, face a strong headwind in this fall's elections for control of Congress[5]
“By almost every conceivable measure Americans are less positive and more critical of government these days,” the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press said in a report released yesterday. The survey results depict “a perfect storm of conditions associated with distrust of government -- a dismal economy, an unhappy public, bitter partisan-based backlash, and epic discontent with Congress and elected officials.”[3]
BUSHONOMICS LOWERED REGULATION AND WALL STREET STEALS, BUSH OUT REPUBLICAN AND TEA PEOPLE CALL FOR LOWER REGULATION TILL THEY GET BACK?
Pew says the recent downward trend in trust in government began in the fall of 2008, when public satisfaction plunged amid the financial crisis. [4]
America's "Great Compromiser" Henry Clay called government "the great trust," but most Americans today have little faith in Washington's ability to deal with the nation's problems.[1]
PUBLIC CONFIDENCE
Public confidence in government is at one of the lowest points in a half century, according to a survey from the Pew Research Center. Nearly 8 in 10 Americans say they don't trust the federal government and have little faith it can solve America's ills, the survey found.[1]
Nearly 80 percent of Americans say they do not trust the U.S. government to do what is right, expressing the highest level of distrust in Washington in half a century, according to a public opinion survey. [2]
MID TERM SWING
The survey illustrates the ominous situation President Barack Obama and the Democratic Party face as they struggle to maintain their comfortable congressional majorities in this fall's elections. Midterm prospects are typically tough for the party in power. Add a toxic environment like this and lots of incumbent Democrats could be out of work.[1]
GOVERNMENT NEGATIVELY AFFECTS OUR LIVES
The survey found that just 22 percent of those questioned say they can trust Washington almost always or most of the time and just 19 percent say they are basically content with it. Nearly half say the government negatively effects their daily lives, a sentiment that's grown over the past dozen years.[1]
Only 22 percent of Americans say they trust the government "just about always" or "most of the time," according to the Pew Research Center survey released on Sunday. [2]
TEA PARTY ANTI GOVERNMENT MOVEMENT
This anti-government feeling has driven the tea party movement, reflected in fierce protests this past week.[1]
The Tea Party movement is a populist United States protest movement that promotes fiscal conservatism The movement emerged in 2009 through an ongoing series of tea Party Protests These are partially in response to the 2008 stimulus package as well as the 2008 bail outs. In 2010 The Economist described the movement as "America's most vibrant political force”[5]
Among Republicans, 28 percent said the Tea Party represents their values better than the current Republican Party. Right- leaning independents said they prefer the Tea Party to the Republican Party by 30 percent to 29 percent.[3]
"The government's been lying to people for years. Politicians make promises to get elected, and when they get elected, they don't follow through," says Cindy Wanto, 57, a registered Democrat from Nemacolin, Pa., who joined several thousand for a rally in Washington on April 15 — the tax filing deadline. "There's too much government in my business. It was a problem before Obama, but he's certainly not helping fix it."[1]
Americans' trust in the federal government has been on a steady decline from a high of 73 percent during the Eisenhower administration in 1958, when the "trust" question was first posed in a national survey, the research center said. [2]
"The Tea Party movement, which has a small but fervent anti-government constituency, could be a wild card in this election. On one hand, its sympathizers are highly energized and inclined to vote Republican this fall. On the other, many Republicans and Republican-leaning independents say the Tea Party represents their point of view better than does the GOP."[4]
PEW SURVEY
The long, bitter debate over the healthcare law that U.S. President Barack Obama signed last month made negative feeling about government, particularly Congress, even worse, according to the report based on a series of surveys of some 5,000 people. [2]
APPROVAL 25% CONGRESS, 40% OBAMA
About 25 percent had a favorable opinion of Congress, the lowest in 25 years of surveying, and less than half (40%) said the Obama administration was doing an excellent or good job, Pew said. [2]
FRUSTRATION
Americans were found to be more frustrated than angry, with 56 percent expressing frustration with the federal government, compared with 21 percent who said they were angry. [2]
GOVERNMENT THREATENS OUR FREEDOM
Forty-three percent of Republicans, 50 percent of independents who lean Republican and 57 percent of those who agree with the Tea Party movement said the government presents a major threat to their personal freedom. [2]
That compares with 18 percent of Democrats, 21 percent of independents who lean Democratic and 9 percent of those who disagree with the Tea Party movement.
The main survey of 2,505 adults was conducted March 11-21. Three other surveys of about 1,000 adults each were conducted March 18-21, April 1-5 and April 8-11. The margin of sampling error for the surveys is plus or minus 4 percentage points. [2]
STATES RIGHTS
Majorities in the survey call Washington too big and too powerful, and say it's interfering too much in state and local matters. The public is split over whether the government should be responsible for dealing with critical problems or scaled back to reduce its power, presumably in favor of personal responsibility.[1]
WE WANT SMALLER GOVERNMENT WITH FEWER SERVICES
About half say they want a smaller government with fewer services, compared with roughly 40 percent who want a bigger government providing more. The public was evenly divided on those questions long before Obama was elected. [1]
Federal agencies and institutions also are viewed much more positively than is Congress. Nonetheless, favorable ratings have fallen significantly since 1997-1998 for seven of 13 federal agencies included in the survey. The declines have been particularly large for the Department of Education, the FDA, the Social Security Administration, as well as the EPA, NASA and the CDC. [4]
WE WANT GOVERNMENT CONTROL IN A RECESSION
Still, a majority supported the Obama administration exerting greater control over the economy during the recession.[1]
POLITICAS HAS POISENED THE WELL. OR AT LEAST THE DEMOCRATIC MAJORITY DID
"Trust in government rarely gets this low," said Andrew Kohut, director of the nonpartisan center that conducted the survey. "Some of it's backlash against Obama. But there are a lot of other things going on."
And, he added: "Politics has poisoned the well." [1]
GOVERNMENT TAKE OVER OF AUTO INDUSTRY
The survey found that Obama's policies were partly to blame for a rise in distrustful, anti-government views. In his first year in office, the president orchestrated a government takeover of Detroit automakers, secured a $787 billion stimulus package and pushed to overhaul the health care system.[1]
THE VOTERS DISLIKE EVERYBODY
But the poll also identified a combination of factors that contributed to the electorate's hostility: the recession that Obama inherited from President George W. Bush; a dispirited public; and anger with Congress and politicians of all political leanings.
"I want an honest government. This isn't an honest government. It hasn't been for some time," said self-described independent David Willms, 54, of Sarasota, Fla. He faulted the White House and Congress under both parties.[1]
WE WANT HONEST GOVERNMENT
The poll was based on four surveys done from March 11 to April 11 on landline and cell phones. The largest survey, of 2,500 adults, has a margin of sampling error of 2.5 percentage points; the others, of about 1,000 adults each, has a margin of sampling error of 4 percentage points.[1]
THE REPUBLICANS WHO CAUSED THE RECESSION WILL BENEFIT IN THE MID TERM ELECTIONS
In the short term, the deepening distrust is politically troubling for Obama and Democrats. Analysts say out-of-power Republicans could well benefit from the bitterness toward Washington come November, even though voters blame them, too, for partisan gridlock that hinders progress.[1]
DISTRUST OF GOVERNMENT COULD LEAD TO VIOLENCE?
In a democracy built on the notion that citizens have a voice and a right to exercise it, the long-term consequences could prove to be simply unhealthy — or truly debilitating. Distrust could lead people to refuse to vote or get involved in their own communities. Apathy could set in, or worse — violence.[1] VIGILANT TEA’S
ELECTORATE LACK OF RESPONSIBILITY
Democrats and Republicans both accept responsibility and fault the other party for the electorate's lack of confidence.[1]
WAKE UP CALL
"This should be a wake-up call. Both sides are guilty," said Sen. Claire McCaskill, D-Mo. She pointed to "nonsense" that goes on during campaigns that leads to "promises made but not promises kept." Still, she added: "Distrust of government is an all-American activity. It's something we do as Americans and there's nothing wrong with it."[1]
WASHINGTON IS BROKEN
Sen. Scott Brown, a Republican who won a long-held Democratic Senate seat in Massachusetts in January by seizing on public antagonism toward Washington, said: "It's clear Washington is broken. There's too much partisan bickering to be able to solve the problems people want us to solve."[1]
As was the case in the 1997 study of attitudes about government, more people say the bigger problem with government is that it runs its programs inefficiently (50%) than that it has the wrong priorities (38%). But the percentage saying government has the wrong priorities has increased sharply since 1997 - from 29% to 38%.[4]
MAJOR PATIES ARE MISSING THE MARK
And, he added: "It's going to be reflected in the elections this fall."
But Matthew Dowd, a top strategist on Bush's re-election campaign who now shuns the GOP label, says both Republicans and Democrats are missing the mark.[1]
PEOPLE WANT A COMMUNITY SOLUTION NOT POLITICAL SOLUTION
"What the country wants is a community solution to the problems but not necessarily a federal government solution," Dowd said.
INDIVIDUAL SOLUTION OR GOVERNMENTAL SOLUTION?
Democrats are emphasizing the federal government, while Republicans are saying it's about the individual; neither is emphasizing the right combination to satisfy Americans, he said.[1]
It says rather than an activist government to deal with the nation's top problems, the public now wants government reformed and growing numbers want its power curtailed.
"With the exception of greater regulation of major financial institutions, there is less of an appetite for government solutions to the nation's problems - including more government control over the economy - than there was when Barack Obama first took office.[4]
Nonetheless, antigovernment sentiment appears to be a more significant driver of possible turnout among Republicans and independents than among Democrats. Perhaps most troubling for Democrats, independent voters who are highly frustrated with government are also highly committed to casting a ballot this year, and they favor the Republican candidates in their districts by an overwhelming 66% to 13% margin.[5]
[1]
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jd_jiGbsExSJ0dfp1Na1YjnRJsfgD9F608UG0
[2]
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/04/19/AR2010041900117.html
[3]
http://www.businessweek.com/news/2010-04-19/pew-study-finds-perfect-storm-of-government-discontent.html
[4]
http://www.newsroomamerica.com/story/10121.html
[5]
http://www.miamiherald.com/2010/04/18/1585606/poll-americans-distrust-of-federal.html
[6]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tea_Party_movement
It was an honor to be present on 4/17/2010 when David Leyton received the Nomination Convention endorsement of the Michigan Democratic Party for the Position of Attorney General. Michigan is hungry for leadership.
David Leyton as Michigan Attorney general will give Michigan a new direction. We should all be proud he is from Genesee County.
What a joy to start this campaign season with Michigan Democrats nominating two excellent candidates.
Benson and Leyton will satisfy our need as a party to have that new breed of highly accomplished candidates for our democratic campaigns.
Benson and David Leyton represent the best.
I went to the nominating convention apprehensive that this would be called Michigan Democratic Party Chairperson Mark Brewers folly. In retrospect, Good Job Mark Brewer.
To the candidates count me and thousands of other good democrats as part of your team.
Thumbnail Pictures of 4/17/10 Convention
http://www.flickr.com/photos/30366181@N05/sets/72157623874917946/
Slide show pictures of 4/17/10 convention
http://www.flickr.com/photos/30366181@N05/sets/72157623874917946/
Michigan will find David Leyton to be an excellent Michigan Attorney General.
Leyton has the experience and presence commanding the respect of the law enforcement community while having the balanced perspective to protect all the rights of Michigan Citizens.
Here are some additional hobby blogger pictures and video of Leyton at the Michigan Democratic Party Nomination Convention.
http://goodmorningflint.blogspot.com/
Posted here by
Terry Bankert
http://www.attorneybankert.com
Flint Divorce Attorney comments on several Issues:
MOTION FOR CHANGE OF CUSTODY AND ISSUES OF ;
CUSTODIAL ENVIRONMENT
*Whether there was an established custodial environment with the defendant-mother; Phillips v. Jordan; McIntosh v. McIntosh; Harvey v. Harvey; Jack v. Jack;
BURDEN OF PROOF
*Whether after finding an established custodian environment existed with defendant alone the trial court used that finding to reverse the burden of proof on the change of custody motion; Fletcher v. Fletcher (After Remand); Vodvarka v. Grasmeyer;
CHANGE IN CIRCUMSTANCES
*Whether the trial court determined whether there was a change of circumstances and properly changed the custodial arrangement; The Child Custody Act
See generally Court: Michigan Court of Appeals (Unpublished 4/6/2010),Case Name: Spears v. Ziemba, e-Journal Number: 45467,Judge(s): Per Curiam – Wilder, O’Connell, and Talbot ,Wayne Circuit Court Family Division,LC No. 00-024757-CC
WAYNE COURT GOT IT RIGHT
The Wayne Circuit Court Family Division called the trial court properly found there was an established custodial environment with the defendant-mother, it did not improperly shift the burden of proof, and granted her motion for change of custody.
THE PARENTS WERE NOT MARRIED
The parties met in 1998. They did not marry. Their only child, M, was born in 1999. Plaintiff commenced this action in 2000. A year or two later, the parties moved to Iowa with M. Later, plaintiff returned to Michigan. M remained in Iowa.
FIRST ORDER WAS SOLE PHYSICAL CUSTODY TO DAD, THE PLAINTIFF
In November 2003, the trial court entered a consent judgment of custody, providing for joint legal custody, and granting sole physical custody of M to plaintiff.
MOM GOT A DETAILED PARENTING TIME PLAN
A detailed parenting time schedule was also set forth in the judgment.
DAD GETS A JOB OFFER AND MOVES, THE PARTIES HAD JOINT LEGAL CUSTODY
In 2007, plaintiff received a job offer with a company located in South Carolina. Plaintiff accepted the job offer and during the time defendant was exercising her summer parenting time with M, plaintiff moved to South Carolina.
WAYNE COURT SAID NOW MOM HAD CUSTODIAL ENVIRONMENT! WHY?
The trial court concluded there was an established custodial environment for M with defendant …
DAD HAD AN ORDER NOT TO REMOVE THE CHILD FROM THE STATE AND HE MOVED.
…because M had been living with defendant since the summer of 2007, pursuant to the trial court's order M not be removed from the state of Michigan after plaintiff moved to South Carolina.
WHY DID MOM HAVE THE CUSTODIAL ENVIRONMENT?
SCHOOL
The trial court noted under its prior order, M was enrolled in school in Michigan, …
LIVING WITH MOM
…had been with defendant for an appreciable time, and …
LOOKED TO MOM FOR GUIDANCE
…naturally looked to her for guidance, discipline, necessities of life, and parental comfort.
EMOTIONAL TIES
The trial court also found the emotional ties between M and defendant were stronger than those between the child and plaintiff.
DAD SAID THE COURT TOOK TOO LONG ON HIS MOTION AND IS PARTY RESPONSIBLE FOR THE CHANGE IN THE CUSTODIAL ENVIRONMENT…DELAY!!!!!
While the court acknowledged plaintiff's valid complaint about the trial court's failure to act expeditiously on his motion to change domicile and on the motion to change custody by permitting a two year delay before bringing the matter to conclusion, nevertheless,….
TOO BAD FOR DAD SAYS THE COURT
…. on the record before the court, the trial court's finding there existed an established custodial environment with defendant was not against the great weight of the evidence.
IT WAS DADS DECISION TO MOVE, HE CAUSED THE CHANGE
The trial court's February 2008 order found a change of circumstances had occurred because plaintiff's relocation to South Carolina led to a change in the established custodial environment.
Accordingly, the trial court did not fail to find the requisite change in circumstances warranting consideration anew of the custodial arrangement. Affirmed.
TIMELINE
The parties met in 1998.
They did not marry.
One childborn in 1999
Plaintiff commenced this action ,custody,in 2000.
A year or two later, the parties and child moved toIowa
Later, mom returned to Michigan.
The child remained with her father in Iowa.
November 2003, the Wayne Court entered a consent judgment of custody, providing for
joint legal custody, and granting sole physical custody of child to dad.
A detailed parenting time schedule was also set forth in the judgment for mom.
2007, dad received a job offer with a company located in South Carolina.
DAD accepted the job offer and during the time Mom defendant was exercising her summer parenting time with the child dad moved to South Carolina.
DAD TOOK THE JOB AND FILED A SPEEDY MOTION, THIS WAS HIS ONLY OPTION
June 28, 2007, dad filed a motion to change domicile in theWayne County Family Court.
The Court procedure caused dads motion to be referred to the circuit court’s Family Evaluation, Mediation and Counseling unit (FEMC), for investigation and recommendation on the motion to change domicile.
THE COURT PROCESS DRAGGED ON FOR 30 DAYS
Now 30 days have elapsed, the summer is ending Dad already had sole custody being exercised is a satte other than Michigan he just wanted to move to a different state with the child.
COURT TELLS DAD YOUR CHILD WILL STAY IN SCHOOL IN MICHIGAN
My read is that the Wayne Court punished father for moving without a court review. When the FEMC recommendation was still pending in August 2007, the Wayne Family Court trial court judge ruled that the child would remain in Michigan and attend school pending a hearing on the motion. This I my opinion was a court caused change in custodial environment.
AT 60 DAYS A PSYCHOLOGIST SAYS THE CHILD SHOULD GO WITH DAD
In September 2007, a psychologist for FEMC recommended granting the request to change domicile.
THE WAYNE COURT WAS IN NO HURRY NO HEARING GRANTED UNTIL SIX MONTHS AFTER THE FILING OF DADS MOTION
The trial court, however, did not hold an evidentiary hearing on the motion to
change domicile until January 2008, and following the hearing …
THE JUDGE WAS STILL IN NO HURRY
…he took the matter under advisement.
MOM WOKE UP AND FILED HER OWN MOTION TO CHANGE CUSTODY, THE JUDGE BY DELAY HAD GIVEN HER A GIFT OF OPPORTUNITY
Before the January 2008 evidentiary hearing, in December 2007, defendant had filed a
motion for change of custody.
THE COURT DENIED THE FATHERS REQUEST TO CHANGE THE CHILDS DOMICILE FROM ONE STATE TO ANOTHER. THE CHILD HAD NOT BEEN LIVING IN MICHIGAN
In February 2008, the trial court denied the motion to change domicile.
CATCH 22 APPLIED HERE . BY SUBMITING TO THE COURT WHEN NO CHANGE OF CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTED THE COURTS OWN DELAY WAS FOUND TO HAVE CREATED A CHANGE IN CIRCUMSTANCES. THE HIGHER COURT SAID OKAY.
The trial court also held that an evidentiary hearing was required on the motion to
change custody because there had been a change in the established custodial environment due to plaintiff’s relocation and the child having remained in Michigan, and thus, there had also been a change in circumstances.
DAD APPEALED LATE
In April 2008, plaintiff filed a delayed application for leave to appeal in this Court from
the trial court’s August 2007 order denying the motion to change domicile. This Court denied the delayed application for leave, Spears v Ziemba, unpublished order of the Court of Appeals, entered June 26, 2008 (Docket No. 284967), stating in part:
In light of plaintiff’s failure to appeal the February 11, 2008[,] opinion and order denying his motion to change the child’s domicile and his failure to remain in Iowa, the delayed application for leave to appeal is DENIED for failure to persuade the Court of the need for immediate appellate review.
THE WAYNE COURTS HEARING ON MOMS REQUEST MUST HAVE BEEN FAULTY. WHY?
However, the matter is REMANDED to the trial court to promptly conduct a hearing on
defendant’s motion to change custody.
The City of Flint has indicated that it cannot afford Pierce Golf Course.
It plans to close it!
Why not give Mott Community College a long term minimal lease for the golf course , the club house, tennis court and lawn bowling.
Why not let Mott put their culinary arts program in the club house to teach and run the concession and cater the hall.
Why not approach Ferris University that has a presence on the Mott campus and has a Golf Course management program to run the complex.
Why let these courses set vacant.
Why not offer Mott Golf Course to Kettering University?
There must be a Put Putt we can give U of M Flint. !!!!!
PRETEND YOU ARE IN A BOX, OPEN THE LID, STEPT OUT, NOW YOU ARE THINKING OUTSIDE THE BOX.
Why not let other public institutions run these sites, if they are willing.
I over heard part of this thought in a conversation yesterday, sounds good to me.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/30366181@N05/sets/72157623689858175/show/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/30366181@N05/sets/72157623689858175/show/
Thank You Congressman Kildee.
It is the Congressional office that gets federal grants.
The Council and administration should be appaluded for good things that happen on their watch.
Lets hope that Congressman Kildee can find the funding for 100 additional police officers.
Kudos to all involved in this success to provide adequate fire protection for Flint.
The reality is Flint is unsafe and bankrupt or our city leaders are playing political brinksmanship, which we should not tolerate.
To the elected leaders of the City of Flint we have a hot summer approaching, get the economic house in order , get us more police officers or get out of the way.
Congressman Kildee you have the reputation of a leader. You have proved it once again. Thank You
http://www.mlive.com/news/flint/index.ssf/2010/04/flint_firefighters_union_its_a.html
Flint Divorce Lawyer Terry Bankert looks at the impact of taking the children to meet the new boyfriend or girl friends in these celebrity facts. This is a Michigan only analysis.
RICH ROUNDERS RULE.
A HOMELESS MAN WAS HEARD TO BE SINGING
Conceived in the USA, rich and entitled to loves play. Arrangement allows him to stay. Girl friend , house wife, divorcing husband now has to pay. Conceived in the USA, rich guy gets to walk away. Living in the USA. The rest of us have to pay and pay and pay.
IT DOES NOT TAKE A LOT TO BE AN AMERICAN HERO. IT TAKES MORE TO BE A GOOD HUSBAND AND MAN.
Bruce Springsteen had an affair with a 45-year-old New Jersey housewife who ran next to him at the gym, according to court papers filed as part of her divorce proceedings. Weirdly, the Post reports she looked a lot like Patti Scialfa, his band mate and wife of 18 years. [3]
AFFAIR BREAKS UP MARRIAGE.
The New York Post reported today that there is a woman alleging an affair with The Boss.[1]
The New Jersey woman, Ann Kelly, was identified in divorce papers filed by her husband. Divorce papers say that she had an affair with none other than Bruce Springsteen.[2]
A Michigan or Flint Divorce Court Motion for Custody would talk of the affair.
THE GIRL FRIEND HAD IT MADE. WAS SHE HAPPY?
Ann Kelly, 45, was a housewife living with her mortgage-broker husband and two children in a $600,000 home in a leafy New Jersey suburb.[2]
LOVE BLOOMS
She says they met at the gym and that she had an affair with him for several years.[1]
But when the married Springsteen entered her life in 2005 -- showering her with concert tickets, serenading her during rehearsals and confessing she was on his mind while he toured -- the Jersey girl got lost in a "Tunnel of Love," court records alleged.[2]
SHE SUCCEEDED IN TRYING TO IMPROVE HER POSITION.
Ann Kelly, didn’t hold down a job, instead she spent money on self improvement measures like plastic surgery and a gym membership at THE Atlantic Club where she supposedly became acquainted with the singer beginning in 2005. Papers submitted by her husband Aruthur Kelly, who's seeking the divorce, say Springsteen would stand at the end of her treadmill and told her she had the "nicest ass" in the place. [3]
IN A MICHIGAN DIVORCE WHAT IMPACT ON THE DECISION OCCURS WHEN A PARENT LETS THE KIDS MEET THE NEW BOY FRIEND OR GIRL FRIEND?
Soon the singer and his gym buddy were having lunch, and bringing her two kids along. [3]
It is “ Fault” to expose the children this way. This concept of fault can be measured in a custody decision not withstanding Michigan’s no-fault divorce statute. Feldman v Feldman, 55 Mich App 147, 222 NW2d 2 (1974); Kretzschmar v Kretzschmar, 48 Mich App 279, 210 NW2d 352 (1973).
In Michigan a statute called the best interest of the children guides child custody decisions. There are A- L factors.
Factor “f” measures the Mothers and Fathers relative moral fitness focusing on how they will function as a parent the court does not decide who is the morally superior adult. Fletcher v Fletcher, 447 Mich 871, 526 NW2d 889 (1994) (error in finding that this factor favored plaintiff; there was no evidence that defendant’s extramarital affairs had any adverse effect on her ability to raise children).
It can be said an extramarital affair is not necessarily a reliable indicator of the party’s parenting ability, in Berger v Berger, 277 Mich App 700, 747 NW2d 336 (2008), the unique nature of mothers affair, i.e., being seduced by a celebrity and then introducing his to the children. demonstrated extraordinarily poor judgment and lack of insight about the impact her conduct could have on everyone in the household, including, ultimately, the children.
HE HAS BEEN DOWN THIS PATH BEFORE
Bruce Springsteen is married to E Street Band member Patti Sciaifa. They began their relationship while he was still married to his first wife, Julianne Phillips. He left Phillips to be with Patti. Bruce Springsteen and Patti Sciaifia had their first child in 1990. They were married in 1991 and had a second child that year. Their youngest child was born in 1994.[1]
POLITICALLY THEY HAD THEIR OWN BI PARTISAN STIMULUS PLAN
A the pair got closer, the liberal leaning blue-collar icon gave Kelly, a conservative, books to read and told her he’d thought about her while on tour, the documents claim. [3]
OH, HOW SWEET IT IS
He personally delivered front-row tickets to attend rehearsals, after which Kelly told her husband’s mother "It felt like Bruce Springsteen was singing to me." All the while Aruthur Kelly was aware at least of an infatuation with the singer since, according to the papers, Springsteen was a frequent topic of conversation in chats with a marriage counselor.[3]
No comment yet from Springsteen about the affair.[2]
YOU HAVE TO PICK YOUR PRIORITIES
In 2008, the NJ woman was spotted dining with the star, while her spouse was undergoing open heart surgery in Cleveland. Allegedly the wronged husband decided to call it quits after Kelly and her famous beau were seen kissing in the fitness center’s parking lot, though she’s still has never admitted having her relationship with Springsteen was sexual. Meanwhile, a source says the Boss and his wife are chugging right along. [3]
THE GOOD LIFE GOES ON
"Bruce and Patti continue to have a terrific marriage and are very devoted to each other and their children," said a friend. [3]
Posted here by
Terry R. Bankert
A Flint MI Divorce Lawyer.
http://attorneybankert.com
Find your Michigan County Divorce Court.
http://dumpmyspouse.com
Register for the free Newsletter ‘Family Law Advisor”
http://marraigeover.blogspot.com/
see
[1]
http://www.examiner.com/x-40713-Celebrity-Relationships-Examiner~y2010m4d4-Bruce-Springsteen-joins-list-of-cheaters
[2]
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/04/04/bruce-springsteen-stole-a_n_524588.html
[3]
http://gothamist.com/2010/04/04/bruce_springsteens_alleged_affair_w.php
Flint Divorce attorney comments on the issues of the Carrere divorce if it was filed in Michigan.
FILING FOR DIVORCE
Wayne's World star Tia Carrere has filed for divorce to end her seven-year marriage.
Grounds for divorce in Michigan.
“[T]here has been a breakdown of the marriage relationship to the extent that the objects of matrimony have been destroyed and there remains no reasonable likelihood that the marriage can be preserved.”
In Michigan divorce procedure if she had filked here Tia Carrer may not include any other explanation of the grounds in the complaint. Her Husband Simon Wakelin could then admit or deny the grounds. The court may consider an admission but is not bound by it in its final deliberation
The initial Michigan and Flint divorce documents in cases without children would be a summons, a complaint, filing fees, and a record of divorce or annulment (some counties require filing at the time of entry of the judgment).
If Carrere and Wakelin had minor children or a request for spousal support, a verified statement must be served on the other party and provided to the Friend of the Court. The initial filing for a divorce with minor children must also include information about custody proceedings and the names and birth dates of the minor children.
The Michigan and Flint Divorce petition or complaint must include the following:
The statutory grounds for divorce, without further explanation.
The parties’ complete names and their names before marriage.
Residency information.
Whether a party is pregnant.
The required case caption language .
Whether there are minor children of the parties or minor children born during the marriage.
The complete names and birth dates of any minors involved in the action, including minor children of the parties and all children born during the marriage.
Whether there is property to be divided.
If a request for protection of property is made, facts sufficient to support the relief requested.
If spousal support is requested, a showing of the need for support and the other party’s ability to pay.
If there are minors or a request for child support, whether any Michigan court has continuing jurisdiction over the minor and, if so, the court and file number.
If custody of a minor is to be determined, the following must be included in the complaint or in an attached affidavit: (1) the child’s present address, (2) places where the child has lived within the last five years, (3) names and present addresses of persons with whom the child has lived during that period, (4) whether the party has participated in other litigation concerning the custody of the child in Michigan or elsewhere, (5) whether the party knows of a proceeding that could affect the current child custody proceeding, and (6) whether the party knows of a person who is not a party to the proceedings who has physical custody of the child or claims custody or parenting time rights.
Filing fees may be waived. Fees and costs must be waived or suspended for persons receiving public assistance and indigent persons. The judge may hold a hearing to determine if the person is indigent.
LONG OR SHORT TERM MARRIAGE
In a Michigan and Flint contested Divorce , spousal support is a useful tool, especially when the attorney is representing a spouse in a long-term marraige or where there is a substantial disparity in income between the spouses. When a Flint divorce terminates a long-term marraige spousal support is used in its traditional sense as support and maintenance of a former spouse who is unable to support himself or herself at a comparable standard of living due to years of financial dependence. The longer the marraigethe older the recipient; the less able the recipient is to support himself or herself due to lack of education, job skills, or on-the-job experience; the more likely spousal support is to be awarded.
NO FAULT
The actress filed papers in Los Angeles on Friday, citing irreconcilable differences for the split. [1]
Most in Divorce have heard of no-fault divorce. The phrase no-fault divorce means it is not necessary to prove fault by a party—for example, infidelity or abuse—for a divorce to be granted. However, the court may consider fault in determining the distribution of property and in ruling on spousal support.
REPRESENT YOUR SELF
The Waynes world star 43 is acting as her own attorney.[2]
Many People in Michigan and flint Divorce represent themselves or appear in pro per.
Why:
Lack of funds to hire attorney
Distrust of attorneys
Inability to secure counsel as indigent due to lack of programs and/or
conflict where legal aid represents spouse
Stated intent to keep things “friendly” through divorce, etc.
Maximum preservation of marital assets for division (avoid attorney fees even if they can be afforded).
Failure to adequately understand pitfalls of self-representation
She wed photographer Simon Wakelin, her second husband, on New Year's Eve in 2002.
SOLE CUSTODY PHYSICAL AND LEGAL
Carrere is asking for sole custody of the couple's four-year-old daughter, Bianca. [1]
The term physical custody, as commonly used by the court, typically focuses on where the child resides. MCLA 722.26a(7)(a).
Legal custody is the authority to make important decisions regarding the welfare of the child. Wellman v. Wellman, 203 Mich App 277, 512 NW2d 68 (1994). Price v. Price, Westlaw 1609013, unreported, decided December 14, 2001
The court must make findings on this issue before deciding custody.
Statutory standard.
There is an established custodial environment if over an appreciable period of time, the child naturally looks to the custodian in that environment. The court must also consider
the age of the child,
the physical environment, and
the inclination of the custodian and the child as to the permanency of the relationship.
The court makes a factual determination regarding whether there is an established custodial environment; the court is not bound by the parties’ stipulation.
Determine burden of proof.
If there is an established custodial environment, a change of custody may be made only on clear and convincing evidence that the change is in the best interests of the child.
If no established custodial environment exists, custody may be changed on showing by a preponderance of the evidence that the custodial arrangement is in the best interests of the child.
Effect of certain facts.
Prior custody orders—mere existence does not create an established custodial environment.
Custodial parent voluntarily relinquishes custody—all factors must be examined to determine if a new custodial environment is created. Public policy encourages a parent with difficulties to temporarily relinquish custody to resolve his or her problems.
In prejudgment cases where the parties are residing together, the judge makes the determination on a preponderance of the evidence.
The best interests of the child is the standard used in custody disputes between parents, agencies, and third parties.
The court must consider each factor and make findings on the record.
The factors need not have equal weight; the court determines the weight of each factor.
Factors.
(a) The love, affection, and other emotional ties existing between the parties involved and the child. This factor focuses on the emotional bond that already exists between the parent and the child.
(b) The capacity and disposition of the parties involved to give the child love, affection, and guidance and to continue the education and raising of the child in his or her religion or creed, if any. This factor tries to project the parent’s ability to foster an emotional bond in the future, and the parent’s impact on such matters as education, guidance, and religious training.
(c) The capacity and disposition of the parties involved to provide the child with food, clothing, medical care or other remedial care recognized and permitted under the laws of this state in place of medical care, and other material needs.
(d) The length of time the child has lived in a stable, satisfactory environment, and the desirability of maintaining continuity.
(e) The permanence, as a family unit, of the existing or proposed custodial home or homes. This factor focuses solely on the permanence of the family environment, not the acceptability of the home or child care arrangements.
(f) The moral fitness of the parties involved. This factor evaluates the parties’ moral fitness only as it relates to how they will function as a parent and not as to who is the morally superior adult.
(g) The mental and physical health of the parties involved. This factor should not impair or defeat the public policy goal of integrating disabled persons into the mainstream of society.
(h) The home, school, and community record of the child.
(i) The reasonable preference of the child, if the court considers the child to be of sufficient age to express preference. The court must take the preference of the child into account if it decides that the child is old enough to express a preference. The court is not required to disclose the child’s preference. The child’s preference does not automatically outweigh other factors; it is only one element used to make the determination.
(j) 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 parent or the child and the parents.
(k) Domestic violence, regardless of whether the violence was directed against or witnessed by the child.
( l ) Any other factor considered by the court to be relevant to a particular child custody dispute. The court may not consider the race of a parent’s spouse in considering whether to change custody.
PRE NUPTIAL AGREEMENT
The couple have a pre nuptial agreement.[2]
In a Flint Divorce Court MCLA 557.28, MSA 26.165(8) provides that a contract that relates to property and that is made between persons in contemplation of marriage remains in full force after the marriage takes place.
The Michigan Supreme Court recognized, in the early case of Hockenberry v Donovan, 170 Mich 370, 136 NW 389 (1912), that marital agreements will be enforced if the parties to the agreement are mature and have a full understanding of the agreement and no fraud is involved. Marriage, as well as the waiver of property rights, constitutes sufficient consideration to support the contract. Id. at 380.
The leading Michigan case on marital agreements that govern the distribution of property at death is In re Estate of Benker, 416 Mich 681, 331 NW2d 193 (1982). In Benker, the court affirmed that such antenuptial agreements are generally favored by public policy. However, the court also noted that there must be a fair disclosure of assets by both parties for the agreement to be valid. The court said premarital agreements “give rise to a special duty of disclosure not required in ordinary contract relationships so that the parties will be fully informed before entering into such agreements.” Id. at 689
NOT THE FIRST TIME
The actress' first marriage to Elie Samaha also ended in divorce after seven years. She split from the producer in 2000.[1]
Posted here by
Terry R Bankert a Michigan/Flint Divorce lawyer
http://attorneybankert.com/
To Find your Michgian County Court House go to
http://dumpmyspouse.com/
see
[1]
http://jam.canoe.ca/Television/2010/04/03/13453311-wenn-story.html
[2]
http://www.people.com/people/article/0,,20357726,00.html?xid=rss-topheadlines
COULD SANDRA BULLOCK SEEK GUARDIANSHIP AND THEN CUSTODY OF THE CHILD OF JESSE JAMES. ?
Jesse James Once Again In Child Custody Battle With Ex-Wife[1]
Flint Divorce Attorney Terry Bankert comments on the Family Law applicable if Jesse James Custody case was in Michigan.
CHILD CUSTODY
The Press released recently, Motorcycle builder Jesse James is once again in fights with ex-wife Janine Lindermulder over their child . James is now married to Sandra Bullock as of July 2005, but the fight over custody with his ex-wife returns in light of the now alleged scandal.[1]
Jesse James has Custody of his daughter.
In Michigan and Flint Divorce Courts the Child Custody Act demands an assessment of the ability of individual parents to care for their children. The act standardizes the criteria for the best interests of the child and creates a comprehensive framework for decisions regarding child custody. Wealton v Wealton, 120 Mich App 406, 327 NW2d 493 (1982).
CHANGE IN CHILD CUSTODY
The porn star ex-wife of Sandra Bullock's hubby has reportedly decided to take him to court to get custody of their daughter. [2]
In Michigan and Flint Divorce Court a child custody order is never unchangeable. The Child Custody Act allows a trial court to modify child custody orders “for proper cause shown or because of change of circumstances,” and if in the child’s best interests. MCL 722.27(1)(c).
There is a lot of proper cause here.
DAD HAS CUSTODY OF DAUGHTER
James currently has full custody of Sunny since Lindermulder lives in a halfway house after being found guilty of tax evasion, TMZ reported.[2]
Sources told the celebrity site that Lindermulder knew she didn't stand a chance of gaining even partial custody from James…[2]
In Michigan and Flint Divorce Court the court must consider three issues before modifying a custody order: (1)Has the petitioner carried the initial burden of establishing either “proper cause shown” or a “change of circumstances”? (2) Is there an established custodial environment? and (3) Is the modification in the best interests of the child?
The requirement to find a change of circumstance or proper cause and not changing an established custodial environment without clear and convincing evidence—are intended to “erect a barrier against removal of a child from an established custodial environment and to minimize unwarranted and disruptive changes of custody orders
NON CUSTODIAL EX PORN STAR MOM IS IN HALF WAY HOUSE AFTER PRISON.
Lindermulder is hoping to get her six-year-old daughter Sunny back, although she currently lives in a halfway house after the feds busted her for tax evasion . [1]
If this were a Flint Divorce Court cause the burden will be on Lindermulder to show a change in circumstances.
The Flint Divorce Courts first issue will be to considered whether the biological mother has shown the requisite “proper cause” or “change of circumstances” directed by MCL 722.27(1)(c). Vodvarka v Grasmeyer, 259 Mich App 499, 675 NW2d 847 (2003). The existence of proper cause or a change of circumstances is a threshold matter in any consideration of a change to a prior custody order. The biological mother here has the burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence that either proper cause or a change of circumstances exists before the trial court can consider whether an established custodial environment exists (thus establishing the burden of proof) and conduct a review of the best interests factors. Id. at 509.
MOM ADMITS SHE CANNOT PROVIDE STABILIZING ENVIRONMENT
Lindermulder previously believed, say sources, that she would have a difficult time getting even partial custody of Sunny because Bullock was considered "a stabilizing family influence." [1]
A Michgian Flint Divorce Court must follow the Michigan Child Custody Act which contains a strong policy statement that “the best interests of the child” must be the court’s controlling guide in custody disputes. MCL 722.25. MCL 722.23 defines the “best interests of the child” . Stability is directly addressed in section (d) The length of time the child has lived in a stable, satisfactory environment, and the desirability of maintaining continuity.
IS DAD CURRENT MARITAL ISSUES ENOUGH TO CHANGE CUSTODY?
Now, sources state, in light of the scandal, Lindermulder hopes she has a better chance of getting her daughter back.[1]
GREAT STEP MOTHER
Before the scandal broke, Bullock had stated her joy in helping to raise Sunny, even having helped James get custody of the girl.[1]
MOTHERHOOD
In her Oscar acceptance speech for The Blind Side, Bullock said, "I would like to thank what this film is about for me, which are the mom’s that take care of the babies and the children no matter where they come from. Those moms and parents never get thanked."
CAN ESTRANGED WIFE AND STEP MOTHER GET CUSTODY?
However, Bullock isn't through with her stepdaughter Sunny, Bradley said. US has reported that she's looking to get custody of the 6-year-old girl, Bradley said. [3]Jacobs said on "The Early Show," "Think about it, Sandra's been married to Jesse for five years and they have raised this girl together. Her mother, her biological mother, is in a halfway house, she was a former porn star, she's an admitted drug addict. [3]
So basically Sandra has been this girl's mother. [3]
Now she wants to divorce Jesse, but she still wants to raise Sunny.
[3]It's an interesting legal question, because Sandra, of course, is not the biological (mother) or (has any) legal claims to this girl. But she basically is her mother." [3]Bullock's representatives have denied the star is seeking custody. [3]
IF THIS WAS A MICHIGAN CASE SANDRA BULLOCK COULD SEEK GUARDIANSHIP
James is currently in a rehabilitation facility for sex and drug addiction, according to Radar Online and US Weekly. [3]
Lindermulder is hoping to get her six-year-old daughter Sunny back, although she currently lives in a halfway house after the feds busted her for tax evasion . [1]
In Michigan and Flint a minor guardianship is a mechanism to give a person other than a custodial parent power to make decisions on behalf of a minor. A custodial parent may join the armed forces, enter drug treatment, be sent to prison, be too young to handle parenting responsibilities, or simply disappear. If the child is left with a person without legal authority a guardianship may be sought.
A full guardianship could be found in a Michigan court if it were the proper jurisdiction,which it is not, based on the following.
The parent or parents have permitted the minor to reside with another person and have not provided that person with legal authority for the care and maintenance of the minor. MCL 700.5204(2)(b). These circumstances must exist at the time the petition is filed.
AFTER STEP MOM GETS GUARDIANSHIP SHE CAN SEEK CUSTODY.
A guardian or limited guardian of a child can bring an action for custody of the child. MCL 722.26b; see also Walterhouse v Ackley, 459 Mich 924, 589 NW2d 780 (1998) (statutory provision that gives limited guardians standing to seek custody may be applied to guardianships in place before statute’s 1990 effective date). MCL 722.26b.
Posted here by
Terry Bankert
http://www.attorneybankert.com/
See.
[1]
http://tmdcelebritynews.com/headlines-jesse-james-once-again-in-child-custody-battle-with-ex-wife/05194
[2]
http://www.nypost.com/p/news/national/bullock_hubby_in_renewed_child_custody_FrIVidsBvn8TdJjBnE3jKK
[3]
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/03/31/earlyshow/leisure/celebspot/main6350168.shtml
Posts
All Comments
