FLINT DIVORCE LAWYER, TIGER WOODS AND CHILD CUSTODY CASE.

Child Custody Issues discussed by Flint Divorce Lawyer Terry Bankert:

TO FLINT PARENTS ORDERS FOR CUSTODY AND KEEPING IT ARE CRITICAL

We read daily the turmoil that custody disputes can cause the rich and famous. This same turmoil confront every parent in divorce.[trb]
And one source familiar with the situation tells … that the couple ,… ( Elign Nordegren
and Tiger Woods)…will share joint custody of the children if the divorce goes through.[4]


FLINT Divorce;

DID YOU KNOW:

Grounds for divorce.

“[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.”[3]

HOW MANY TIMES IS THIS PART VIOLATED?

The plaintiff may not include any other explanation of the grounds in the complaint. The defendant may admit or deny the grounds. The court may consider an admission but is not bound by it.[3]

FLINT DIVORCE Child custody;

DID YOU KNOW THE FOUNDATION OF A CUSTODY ARGUMENT IS CUSTODIAL ENVIRONMENT:

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.[3]


THE NEXT STEP IF NO PRIOR ORDER IS A BEST INTEST ANALYSIS


Best interests of the child.

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.[3]


Whether the trial court properly denied the plaintiff-father's request for a "best interests" custody hearing by finding he had not made the required demonstration of proper cause or a change in circumstances; [1]



MCL 722.28; Berger v. Berger; Brausch v. Brausch;



Whether plaintiff abandoned his issue by failing to properly brief it and failing to cite to the case record; MCR 7.212(C)(7); [1]



Eldred v. Ziny; Lack of evidence as to proper cause or change in circumstances;

Vodvarka v. Grasmeyer [1]



SUMMARY: Fathers/Plaintiff’s recitation of potential grounds for proper cause center on three facts:

1.Defendant has allowed, on an informal basis, plaintiff to exercise a growing amount of parenting time since the 2005 judgment of divorce;

2. Defendant now works three days a week; and

3.Plaintiff moved and has remarried and his wife has a growing relationship with the children.

Based on these factors, father/plaintiff asked the Oakland County trial court to, in effect, formalize the parties’ informal parenting time arrangement in the wake of a disagreement surrounding the arrangement.[2]



HONORED REQUEST FOR CHANGE NOT A SOWRD OF CHANGE



Here the Michigan Court of Appeals could not conclude the Oakland Circuit Court ,Family Division court's determination not to hold a best interests hearing was a palpable abuse of discretion or clear legal error where the fact the defendant-mother voluntarily modified the parenting schedule on occasion to accommodate the plaintiff-father's request for more parenting time should not be used as a "sword to forge a change" in the previously court ordered arrangement, and the remaining factors he cited did not support his claim of error. [1]



WHEN YOU VOTE YOUR FAMILY COURT JUDGES ARE IMPORTANT

In custody cases, all orders and judgments by the trial court shall be affirmed unless “the trial judge made findings of fact against the great weight of evidence or committed a palpable abuse of discretion or a clear legal error on a major issue.” MCL 722.28; Berger v Berger, 277 Mich App 700, 705; 747 NW2d 336 (2008).[2]



NO CHANGE OF CIRCUMSTANCES



Thus, the Oakland Circuit Court ,Family Division held plaintiff's allegations were insufficient to show sufficient cause or material changes in circumstance and then Michigan Court of Appeals agreed. [1]



POOR PRESENTATION ON FATHERS PART



We observe that plaintiff has abandoned this issue on appeal by failing to properly brief

it. Plaintiff’s recitation of applicable facts contains no citation to the factual record of this case (or any other record). MCR 7.212(C)(7). Plaintiff’s argument is one sentence long and contains no citation to supporting authority. Id. An appellant may not simply announce a position on appeal and leave it to this Court to rationalize the basis for that claim. Eldred v Ziny, 246 Mich App 142, 150; 631 NW2d 748 (2001).[2]



DIVORCED WITH FOUR CHILDREN



The parties were divorced in November 2005, and had 4 children between 1998 and 2004. [1]

MOM CUSTODY DAD WITH SUBSTANTIAL PARENTING

The original judgment of divorce granted the plaintiff physical custody of the children and granted defendant substantial parenting time. [1]



DAD: SHE LET ME HAVE MORE NOW THE COURT SHOULD TAKE MORE



He argued the trial court erred in denying his motion seeking a best interests hearing based on a demonstration of proper cause or a change in circumstances. [1]

STEP MOMMY GROWING DEMANDS?

Plaintiff alleged defendant had allowed, on an informal basis, plaintiff to exercise a growing amount of parenting time, she now works three days a week, he moved and remarried, and his wife has a growing relationship with the children.[1]

DAD JUST WANTS TO FORMALIZE, STABILIZE THE NEW STATUS QUO

Thus, he asked the trial court to formalize the parties' informal parenting time arrangement to avoid a disagreement about the arrangement. [1]



OH NO FILBER THIS WILL STOP PARENTS FROM COOPERATING

The court concluded to hold as plaintiff requested would discourage custodial parents from permitting a non-custodial parent greater parenting time than granted by court order. Also, the other factors plaintiff cited did not support his claim of error. [1]



THIS SHOULD BE ABOUT THE CHILDREN



Notably absent from his allegations was any recitation of what effects the alleged changes have had or will have on the children. [1]



DADDY JUST THINKING OF HIMSELF AND POSSIBLY STEP MOM

His allegations seemed to focus on what plaintiff wanted - more guaranteed parenting time - and not what impact this change would have on the children. [1]



It is not sufficient to identify material changes in circumstances without linking those changes to their effects on the children.[2]

Posted 5/11/2010

By Terry Bankert

http://attorneybankert.com



See:



[1], from e-journal

Court: Michigan Court of Appeals (Unpublished)May 6, 2010,Case Name: S v. S. ,No. 294259,Oakland Circuit Court ,Family Division, LC No. 04-695786-DM

e-Journal Number: 45737,Judge(s): Per Curiam - Markey, Zahra, and Gleicher



[CAPITALIZATIONS and trb are Terry Bankerts comments]



[2] See [1] from the case



[3]

Michigan Family Law Benchbook



[4]

http://celebs.gather.com/viewArticle.action?articleId=281474978227525