Tuesday, February 12, 2013

COURT OF APPEALS UPHOLDS VISITATION RIGHTS OF ACKNOWLEDGED FATHER AS A DE FACTO PARENT OVER WISHES OF BIOLOGICAL PARENTS

COURT OF APPEALS UPHOLDS VISITATION RIGHTS OF ACKNOWLEDGED FATHER AS A DE FACTO PARENT OVER WISHES OF BIOLOGICAL PARENTS

On January 28, 2013, the Washington State Court of Appeals upheld the decision of the Snohomish County Superior Court granting visitation rights to an acknowledged father as a de facto parent over the objections of the biological parents.

The Court’s decision can be found at:

S. Scott Burkhalter 

This content available to the general public for informational purposes only.  The information on this site is not intended to convey legal opinions or legal advice.

HB 1021: Educating parents of the harmful effects of parental abduction in child custody cases

The 2013 Washington State Legislature is considering a bill that would amend RCW 26.09 (Dissolution/Legal Separation Proceedings).  The proposed bill would require any parent who commences divorce or legal separation proceedings involving a minor child would be provided a pamphlet, which they acknowledge receipt, explaining the harmful effects of abducting a minor child.  As stated in the proposed bill, “A parent who is considering abducting his or her child should know and understand the potential short-term and long-term traumatic impacts that parental abduction has on a child and consider only those actions that will be lawful and will contribute to the child's best interests.”

S. Scott Burkhalter

This content is available to the general public for informational purposes only.  The information on this site is not intended to convey legal opinions or legal advice.

LIMITED REPRESENTATION—SAVE MONEY ON ATTORNEY’S FEES


Washington State allows attorneys to appear for a limited purpose without having to hire or retain an attorney to handle your entire case.  In a legal proceeding, do you need assistance negotiating final orders, conducting mediation, or arguing a hearing?  Superior Court Civil Rule 4.2 allows attorneys to appear for a specific task, typically with a specific estimate (i.e., how much it will cost), to handle your legal needs.

S. Scott Burkhalter

This content is available to the general public for informational purposes only.  The information on this site is not intended to convey legal opinions or legal advice.

THE CR 2A AGREEMENT


In all cases, lawyers are required to abide by rules established by the Court.  Washington State’s Superior Court Rule 2A (CR 2A) is a rule designed to bind the parties in a lawsuit to an agreement.  The rule states as follows:

RULE 2A
STIPULATIONS

No agreement or consent between parties or attorneys in respect to the proceedings in a cause, the purport of which is disputed, will be regarded by the court unless the same shall have been made and assented to in open court on the record, or entered in the minutes, or unless the evidence thereof shall be in writing and subscribed by the attorneys denying the same.

CR 2A operates in conjunction with RCW 2.44.010, a statute the deals with the authority of an attorney.  RCW 2.44.010 reads, in part, as follows:  “An attorney and counselor has authority:  (1) To bind his or her client in any of the proceedings in an action or special proceeding by his or her agreement duly made, or entered upon the minutes of the court; but the court shall disregard all agreements and stipulations in relation to the conduct of, or any of the proceedings in, an action or special proceeding unless such agreement or stipulation be made in open court, or in presence of the clerk, and entered in the minutes by him or her, or signed by the party against whom the same is alleged, or his or her attorney….”

A party in litigation will most likely encounter the term CR 2A or a CR 2A Agreement following mediation.  Should the parties settle their matter at mediation, the terms of the settlement will be memorialized in writing—a CR 2A Agreement.  The Agreement, once signed by the parties and/or their attorneys, binds the parties to the terms of the agreement.

S. Scott Burkhalter

This content is available to the general public for informational purposes only.  The information on this site is not intended to convey legal opinions or legal advice.

MARRIAGE & THE PRESUMPTION OF PATERNITY—YOU ARE THE FATHER


In the context of marriage, a child born during the marriage or with a specific time period in relation to the date of the marriage, is presumed to be the child of the married

The presumption applies in the following circumstances:

1.         The child is born during the marriage (even if the marriage is later determined to be invalid where the parents believed the marriage was in compliance with the law).

2.         The child is born 300 days after the marriage where the marriage is terminated by death, annulment, dissolution, legal separation, or declaration of invalidity (even if the marriage is later determined to be invalid where the parents believed the marriage was in compliance with the law).

3.         After the birth of the child, the parties are married (even if the marriage is later determined to be invalid where the parents believed the marriage was in compliance with the law) and the person voluntarily asserted parentage of the child.

4.         After the birth of the child, the parties are married (even if the marriage is later determined to be invalid where the parents believed the marriage was in compliance with the law) and the person voluntarily asserted parentage of the child, and:

a.         The assertion is in a record filed with the state registrar of vital statistics;

b.         The person agreed to be and is named as the child's parent on the child's birth certificate; or

c.         The person promised in a record to support the child as his or her own.

A person is also presumed to be the parent of a child if, for the first two years of the child’s life, the person resided in the same household with the child and openly held out the child as his or her own.

The presumption of parentage may only be rebutted by an adjudication as provided by law.  If a party believes the other spouse is not the parent, this presumption may be challenged up to four years after the birth of the child or as otherwise provided by law.


This content available to the general public for informational purposes only.  The information on this site is not intended to convey legal opinions or legal advice.

SPOUSAL MAINTENANCE: ONE’S NEED & THE OTHER’S ABILITY TO PAY


Amount & Time:  “As the Court deems just”

Spousal maintenance is governed by RCW 26.09.09.  The amount of spousal maintenance to be paid and the length of time the maintenance is to be paid is “as the Court deems just.”  In making that determination, the Court considers several factors:

(a) The financial resources of the party seeking maintenance, including separate or community property apportioned to him or her, and his or her ability to meet his or her needs independently, including the extent to which a provision for support of a child living with the party includes a sum for that party;

(b) The time necessary to acquire sufficient education or training to enable the party seeking maintenance to find employment appropriate to his or her skill, interests, style of life, and other attendant circumstances;

(c) The standard of living established during the marriage or domestic partnership;

(d) The duration of the marriage or domestic partnership;

(e) The age, physical and emotional condition, and financial obligations of the spouse or domestic partner seeking maintenance; and

(f) The ability of the spouse or domestic partner from whom maintenance is sought to meet his or her needs and financial obligations while meeting those of the spouse or domestic partner seeking maintenance.

Need & Ability to Pay

One way to evaluate spousal maintenance is simple math.  Consider the income of each of the party’s, their post separation, reasonable expenses, and the child support transfer payment (if applicable).  After doing the math, if one spouse has a surplus and the other a deficit, then this would amount to the basic spousal maintenance transfer payment.

                                    SPOUSE A                             SPOUSE B

                                    +Income                                  +Income
                                    -Expenses                                -Expenses
                                    -Child Support                         +Child Support
                                    = (+ surplus)                            = (- deficit)

In this example, SPOUSE A has the ability to pay spousal maintenance and SPOUSE B has a need for spousal maintenance.  Thus, there would be a spousal maintenance transfer payment from SPOUSE A to SPOUSE B.

S. Scott Burkhalter

This content available to the general public for informational purposes only.  The information on this site is not intended to convey legal opinions or legal advice.

THE DOG, THE CAT, THE HORSE & PARROT

Let me preface my comment below by saying, "I love animals."  I grew up with pets, I have pets, I love pets.  Pets are an integral part of one's family.  In a divorce action, where do the pets go?  The short answer is, and should be, by agreement of the parties.  Yes, I have crafted detailed "parenting plans" and "residential schedules" for Ginger the dog or Wasabi the cat; but, in my experience, these plans or schedules almost always lead to future problems.  And, when asking the Court to enforce such an agreement, you will likely encounter an emphatic, no.  Why?  Well, pets are considered chattels.  In legalese, a "chattel" means "personal property."  Yes, property.  Despite your love, affection, and bond with your pet, a pet in Washington State is akin to the value of your car or the value of the shirt on your back.  Thus, when going through a divorce, truly consider where your pet will live following a divorce action.  Do you have children?  Who is awarded the family home?  How old is your pet; is he familiar with his surroundings.  Most importantly, agree where your pet will go--sometimes that means letting go.

S. Scott Burkhalter

This content is available to the general public for informational purposes only.  The information on this site is not intended to convey legal opinions or legal advice.

OBJECTING TO A SPOUSE’S RELOCATION WITH CHILDREN


I have been handed a document from a stranger stating my wife intends to move to another State with our children.  Two years ago, I went through an amicable divorce with my spouse.  In those divorce proceedings, a final parenting plan was entered establishing the residential provisions for our children.  Under the plan, I have every other weekend with the children from Friday evening to Monday morning and every Tuesday and Thursday overnight with shared holidays and school breaks.  I have been told my ex-spouse is considered the primary parent because he/she has the majority of overnights with the children in a calendar year.

I don’t want my children to move to another State.  What do I do?  Take action immediately.  An objection to the relocation (and proposed, revised parenting plan) must be filed and served on the relocating spouse by personal service or by any means of mail requiring a return receipt within thirty days of receipt of the notice if the notice was personally served on you or thirty three days if you intend to serve the objection by mail.  There are specific Court forms you need to use when making your objection.

An objection to a parent relocating with children where a parenting plan is in effect can be procedurally complicated.  The failure to properly object may result in allowing the relocating parent and children to move as a matter of law, and without further Court action.  Our Divorce & Family Law Group is here to help you navigate the process.

S. Scott Burkhalter

This content is available to the general public for informational purposes only.  The information on this site is not intended to convey legal opinions or legal advice.

NOTICE: MOVING, RELOCATION, MODIFYING THE PARENTING PLAN

You have been offered a job in another State.  The job offers better pay and better opportunity.  Two years ago, you went through an amicable divorce with your spouse.  In those divorce proceedings, a final parenting plan was entered establishing the residential provisions for your children.  Under the plan, your ex-spouse has every other weekend with the children from Friday evening to Monday morning and every Tuesday and Thursday overnight with shared holidays and school breaks.  You are considered the primary parent because you have the majority of overnights with the children in a calendar year.

With this new job opportunity and a parenting plan in effect, what do you do?  Washington law requires specific notice requirements in the event you are going to relocate with the children.  Generally speaking, notice must be given no less than sixty (60) days before the date of the intended relocation of the children by personal service or any form of mail requiring a return receipt.  The notice must contain an address where you may be served during the period of objection (30 days), the reason for the relocation, and a statement setting forth the method by which your ex-spouse may object as specifically set forth in RCW 26.09.440.  The notice must also include new contact information for the children, the children’s new school/daycare, and a proposed parenting plan with a revised schedule.  Provided the specific requirements of RCW 26.09.440 are met, the relocation of the children shall be permitted absent timely objection by your ex-spouse.

Relocating with children where a parenting plan is in effect can be procedurally complicated.  The failure to provide proper notice may be grounds for sanctions, including contempt of court.

S. Scott Burkhalter

This content is available to the general public for informational purposes only.  The information on this site is not intended to convey legal opinions or legal advice.

RELOCATING WITH CHILDREN: THE IMPACT ON A PARENTING PLAN—RESIDENTIAL SCHEDULE


The Final Parenting Plan

Two years ago, the parents (petitioner and respondent) went through an amicable divorce.  In those divorce proceedings, a final parenting plan was entered establishing the residential provisions for the parties’ children.  Under the plan, the petitioner has residential time with the children except the respondent has every other weekend with the children from Friday evening to Monday morning and every Tuesday and Thursday overnight with shared holidays and school breaks.  The petitioner is considered the primary parent because the petitioner has the majority of overnights with the children in a calendar year.

The Relocating Parent

The petitioner has been offered a job in another State.  The job offers better pay and better opportunity.  With this new job opportunity and a parenting plan in effect, what must the petitioner do?  Washington law requires specific notice requirements in the event a parent, here the petitioner, is going to relocate with the children.  Generally speaking, notice must be given no less than sixty (60) days before the date of the intended relocation of the children by personal service or any form of mail requiring a return receipt.  The notice must contain an address where the petitioner may be served during the period of objection (30 days), the reason for the relocation, and a statement setting forth the method by which the respondent may object as specifically set forth in RCW 26.09.440.  The notice must also include new contact information for the children, the children’s new school/daycare, and a proposed parenting plan with a revised schedule.  Provided the specific requirements of RCW 26.09.440 are met, the relocation of the children shall be permitted absent timely objection by the respondent.

The Objecting Parent

The respondent has been served with a notice of intended relocation by the petitioner.  The notice states, in part, the children shall be moved to another State.  The respondent does not want the children to move to another State.  What must the respondent do?  Take action immediately.  An objection to the relocation (and proposed, revised parenting plan) must be filed and served on the relocating spouse (the petitioner) by personal service or by any means of mail requiring a return receipt within thirty days of receipt of the notice if the notice was personally served on the respondent or thirty three days if the objection is served by mail.  There are specific Court forms the respondent must use when making the objection.

Will the Children be Allowed to Move?

Each case is different.  Although the guiding principle in any matter involving children is what is in the best interests of the children, where a final parenting plan has already been established, different rules apply.  If the primary parent (here, the petitioner) intends to relocate with the children, there is a rebuttable presumption that the intended relocation of the children will be permitted.  However, a person objecting to the relocation (here, the respondent) may rebut the presumption by demonstrating that the detrimental effect of the relocation outweighs the benefit of the change to the children and the relocating person, based upon several factors.  The factors the Court considers are as follows:

(1) The relative strength, nature, quality, extent of involvement, and stability of the child's relationship with each parent, siblings, and other significant persons in the child's life;

(2) Prior agreements of the parties;

(3) Whether disrupting the contact between the child and the person with whom the child resides a majority of the time would be more detrimental to the child than disrupting contact between the child and the person objecting to the relocation;

(4) Whether either parent or a person entitled to residential time with the child is subject to limitations under RCW 26.09.191 (e.g., domestic violence, neglect, abuse);

(5) The reasons of each person for seeking or opposing the relocation and the good faith of each of the parties in requesting or opposing the relocation;

(6) The age, developmental stage, and needs of the child, and the likely impact the relocation or its prevention will have on the child's physical, educational, and emotional development, taking into consideration any special needs of the child;

(7) The quality of life, resources, and opportunities available to the child and to the relocating party in the current and proposed geographic locations;

(8) The availability of alternative arrangements to foster and continue the child's relationship with and access to the other parent;

(9) The alternatives to relocation and whether it is feasible and desirable for the other party to relocate also;

(10) The financial impact and logistics of the relocation or its prevention; and

(11) For a temporary order, the amount of time before a final decision can be made at trial.
                                                RCW 29.09.480

Relocating with children or objecting to a notice of intended relocation where a parenting plan is in effect can be procedurally complicated.  The failure to provide proper notice may be grounds for sanctions, including contempt of court.  The failure to properly object may result in allowing the relocating parent and children to move as a matter of law, and without further Court action.  Our Divorce & Family Law Group is here to help you navigate the process.

S. Scott Burkhalter

This content is available to the general public for informational purposes only.  The information on this site is not intended to convey legal opinions or legal advice.