Please view today’s blog video by clicking on the following link:
Elliot S. Schlissel, Esq. is a father’s rights attorney. He can be reached at 1-800-344-6431 or by email at schlissel.law@att.net.
Custody Change from Mother to Father: Court States This Was The Best Interest of the Child
September 10, 2014 By
Supreme Court Justice John Colangelo sitting in Westchester County recently changed custody from a mother to a father. A post judgment divorce action was initiated involving a 9 year old child.
History of the Case
The mother and father were divorced in 2009. In 2010, the mother had brought a Family Court proceeding for the purpose of modifying the parenting schedule which was initially set forth in the 2009 Family Court Order. The court at that time found the facts required a change in custody. The court found it was in the child’s best interest custody be changed from the mother to the father. The father was thereafter given full legal custody and final decision making. He was also designated as the primary custodial parent. The court found the mother was incapable of promoting a meaningful relationship between the child and his father.
The Actions of the Mother
While the mother had physical custody of the child she did everything in her power to prevent the father from having a relationship with his son. She tried to totally separate the two. The court found her responsibility was to encourage a healthy relationship between the father and son and she did the opposite. The court therefore changed custody.
Father Awarded Custody by Court
September 8, 2014 By
Elliot S. Schlissel is a father’s rights attorney. He can be reached at 1-800-344-6431, or by email to schlissel.law@att.net
Father Given Sole Custody Due To Mother’s Interference With His Visitation Rights
September 5, 2014 By
The Appellate Division of the Third Department, an appeals court in Upstate New York, recently rendered a decision affirming changing custody from the mother to the father based on the mother’s interference with the father’s rights to visit with the parties’ child.
The parties had initially entered into an agreement whereby the mother was given an award of sole custody. In addition, she was given a one year stay away order of protection against the father.
Father Files Petitions
The father filed a violation petition and custody petition in the Family Court. He alleged the mother had been continually interfering with his parenting time with the parties’ child. There were hearings in the Family Court. The Family Court judge found the mother had not complied with the visitation provisions in the court’s custody orders. The Family Court ordered the custody changed from the mother to the father. The father was given sole custody of the parties’ child. The mother filed an appeal.
The Decision on Appeal
The Appeals Court unanimously affirmed the changing of the custody of the child from the mother to the father. The Appeals Court found the mother had frequently violated the terms and her obligations under the prior court orders requiring her to cooperate with regard to promoting the relationship between the father and child and by refusing to give him his parenting time with the child. Instead of complying with the court orders for long periods of time, the mother simply refused to give the father visitation with the child. The mother intentionally violated court orders on a regular basis.
The Appeals panel took into consideration the fact the mother’s fitness to care for the child had deteriorated. In the end, the appeals court found it was in the child’s best interest to give the father sole custody.
Wife Awarded 100% of Assets Due to Husband’s Failure to Produce Documents
September 4, 2014 By
Elliot S. Schlissel, Family Law Attorney 1-800-344-6431; or schlissel.law@att.net
Custody of Son Changed: Judge Finds Mother Cannot Be Trusted To Be the Custodial Parent of the Parties’ Son
August 29, 2014 By
Supreme Court Justice Colangelo sitting in Westchester County recently had an unusual case presented to him. In this case, the mother had paraded her son from one forensic psychologist to another. This was done in a concerted effort to destroy his relationship with this father. In addition, the mother had hired a former actress in soap operas and paid her $57,000 to help prepare her for her starring role as a witness in the custody case involving her son.
The Trial
There was a trial which lasted 18 months before Justice Colangelo. There were 25 days of testimony by the mother alone. Justice Colangelo found she was fixated on destroying the father’s relationship with the son and therefore “cannot be trusted” to make decisions regarding the parties’ son. Justice Colangelo in his decision went on to state “when left to her own devices she misused her decision making authority to trot a mentally healthy child to numerous psychological appointments clearly aimed to deprive him of a relationship with his father – a result that may have, and if allowed to recur certainly will rob [the boy] of his remaining childhood.” Justice Colangelo changed custody from the mother to the father in spite of the recommendations made by the court appointed psychologist and the attorney for the child.
Hired Forensic Psychologist
Justice Colangelo’s decision deals with the issue of parties’ to custody litigation hiring forensic psychologists to promote one parent’s arguments and with regard to the issue of trial consultants preparing witnesses with regard to their testimony. The judge found the mother was evasive during her two weeks of testimony.
Judge Colangelo indicated in his decision the mother had hired Daniel Lobel, a Westchester psychologist, and paid him $6,000 per day to prepare subjective, result oriented testimony. The judge also stated the mother had spent more than 50 hours with a psychologist, Jonathan Gould, who is a well known forensic evaluator, who helped prepare her for her interview with the court appointed forensic psychologist, Stephen Herman, from Manhattan. Justice Colangelo found the mother had met with numerous mental health professionals and a number of lawyers with regard to her desire to “deprive [the boy] of a meaningful relationship with his father.” The judge found “such a goal might have proven laudable had [the father] actually been the abusive monster [the mother] sought to depict.”
Father a Caring Man
Justice Colangelo went on to state there was no evidence presented at trial that the father was anything other than a caring, responsible man who recognized the need for both parents in the child’s life. Justice Colangelo found the mother’s behavior to be “inimicable” to the welfare of the child. The mother’s arguments that the child needed to be protected from his father were completely without merit.
Justice Colangelo in his decision went on to state “absent the imposition of some stringent boundaries on [the mother’s] prerogatives and conduct, based upon her actions to date, [the child] will surely spend the remainder of his childhood being prodded and probed by a constant parade of mental health professionals seeking to find something wrong with a healthy child who needs only a true, loving relationship with both parents.”
It should be noted the mother has appealed this decision.
Father Seeks to Provide Child Support In the Form of Eggs, Produce and Vegetables
August 27, 2014 By
In a case from Upstate New York, Justice Robert Muller sitting in Essex County, New York, Supreme Court had a new and interesting argument presented to him. The case involved a wife who had left the marital residence with the parties’ three children. Two other children of the parties continued to reside with the father.
Custody Issues
Justice Muller was presented with custody issues within the confines of a divorce case. The mother wanted child support for the children living with her and spousal maintenance (alimony). There were arguments made between the husband and the wife with regard to how much each party was earning. Eventually the court ruled the husband should pay the wife temporary maintenance in the sum of $370 per month.
Father Lives on a Farm
The husband advised the court there was a farm located on the land where the marital residence was located. He sought to have the maintenance paid to the wife in the form of meat, eggs, and vegetables from the farm. The father requested the court allow him to pay the child support and maintenance with regard to the various items grown or maintained on the farm.
Judge Robert Muller found this to be an interesting argument. However, the attorney for the father was unable to produce any precedent which authorized one party to pay maintenance and child support payments with food instead of money. The father’s request to pay the child support payments with food was denied.
Conclusion
For those of us who live in the Metropolitan New York area, this seems like a humorous case. However, in Upstate New York, in rural communities, where cash flow on farms can be difficult to obtain, the argument of getting credit for providing food, eggs, produce, meat and vegetables to a spouse to allow her to feed her children, is an interesting argument. Although I don’t believe the entire child support payment should be allowed to be made in food, it is not inconceivable a court in Upstate New York might someday allow child support payments to be made, with regard to parties living on a farm, with a portion of the food, produce and meat raised on the farm.
Elliot Schlissel is a father’s rights attorney. He represents fathers in divorces, custody and child support proceedings. 
Court Orders Change in Custody Due To Mother Interfering With Father’s Visitation
August 22, 2014 By
There was litigation in the Family Court between a father and a mother. The father alleged the mother had acted in an obstreperous manner, had interfered with his visitation with the parties’ children in violation of court orders and had created a situation which made it extremely difficult for the father to have visitation. The father claimed the mother’s disruptive, antagonistic behavior was not in the children’s best interest and was having a negative impact on the parties’ child.
A trial was held in the Family Court. The mother had declined to have an attorney and had represented herself during these proceedings. At the end of the Family Court trial, the Family Court Judge found there had been a change in circumstances to the extent a change in custody was warranted due to mother’s interference with father’s visitation rights. The mother appealed this proceeding.
Appellate Court Decision
The Appellate Division for the Third Department (an appeals court) upheld the Family Court’s order finding the mother in contempt and changing custody to the father. The Appeals Court found the mother had violated a prior court order with regard to the father’s visitation rights. The court also found the transfer of sole custody of the child to the father was indicated in the circumstances due to the mother’s contentious behavior. The Court found the mother was aware of the terms of the Family Court order giving the father visitation and she intentionally refused to comply with this court order.
The mother had argued she was denied her right to counsel due to the fact she represented herself. However, the appellate court found she was given the opportunity to retain an attorney and declined to do so. The court also found the mother had engaged in obstructionist behavior during the course of the Family Court trial and her responses to questions were evasive.
The appellate court affirmed the decision of the Family Court giving the father sole custody.
Conclusion
This is a major victory for father’s rights! A mother’s obligations when she is the residential custodial parent is to promote a loving, warm relationship between the children and the father. Interference with a father’s visitation rights is appropriate grounds to change custody from the mother to the father.
Grandparents and Obtaining Visitation With Grandchildren
August 19, 2014 By
Most grandparents seek to have warm, loving relationships with their grandchildren. However, sometimes the parents themselves don’t get along. In other situations, one or both of the parents have a falling out with the grandparents and punish them by preventing the grandchildren from seeing them.
Filing A Lawsuit to Compel Grandparents’ Visitation
In the year 2000, the United States Supreme Court, in a case called Troxel v. Granville, dealt with a case involving grandparents’ rights in the State of Washington. The grandparents brought suit for visitation with their grandchildren. In this case the United States Supreme Court held that parents “[have a] fundamental right to make decisions concerning the care, custody, and control of their children.” This has been interpreted as to whether a grandparent will be able to see his grandchildren is solely up to the parents.
New York Law On Grandparents’ Visitation
New York is in the forefront of states in the country with regard to granting grandparents visitation rights. The first step is for the grandparents to bring a grandparents’ visitation rights proceeding in the Family Court in the county in which the child or children are located. The grandparents can allege various arguments to establish it would be in the child or children’s best interests that the grandparents receive visitation with them. Some of the arguments which can be made by grandparents concerning this issue are as follows:
- The grandparents have previously acted in a capacity as custodial parents for the grandchildren.
- The grandparents have had a long and loving relationship with the grandchildren over a significant period of time. Depriving them from interacting with their grandparents will have a negative impact on the grandchildren.
- One or both of the parents of the child or children are lacking in the basic ability to deal with issues of the grandchildren. The grandparents have the capacity to deal with these issues.
- In some cases, grandparents can even show it will be harmful to the grandchildren to deprive them of maintaining the existing relationship with their grandparents.
Grandparents’ Rights in Divorces
When the parents of children get divorced, it is possible to include in the settlement agreement statements giving access to the children to the grandparents. Grandparents’ visitation rights therefore can be specifically built into separation agreements or settlement agreements in divorce proceedings.
Conclusion
Grandparents are unique and they don’t live forever. The relationship between grandparents and their grandchildren can have a significant affirmative impact on their grandchildren’s lives. The love and devotion grandparents have for their grandchildren, coupled with their sense of worldliness, is not something to be underestimated. Courts should be extremely reasonable in granting grandparents access to their grandchildren.
Obtaining Custody for Children Born to Unmarried Fathers
August 14, 2014 By
Paternity Proceeding
In the State of New York, a father can sign an acknowledgment of paternity at the time a child is born. The acknowledgment of paternity specifically states that I am the father of this child. If an acknowledgment of paternity isn’t executed by the father at the time of the child’s birth, the first step in obtaining visitation rights or custody is to file a paternity proceeding.
The Paternity Proceeding
The paternity proceeding is fast and simple if the mother simply says, yes he is the father. However, if the mother disputes the fact he is the father or there is a question in her mind as to who the father is, the court in New York will order DNA testing to ascertain whether this man is actually the father of the child.
Custody Petitions and Visitation Petitions
Once paternity is established, the next step is to file an application for custody or in the alternative for visitation with the child. These petitions are filed in the Family Court in the county where the child is located. This petition can ask for sole custody, joint custody, or just simply for visitation. After the petition is filed, the court will make arrangements to serve the child’s mother. The two of you will then have to appear in court on the return date of the petition.
Establishing That You Are The Superior Custodial Parent
If you seek custody of your child, you must show it is in the child’s best interest you be named the residential custodial parent. In addition, you can show why the mother should not have custody of her child. Issues the mother has with drug abuse, child abuse, child neglect, prior history of drug abuse, criminal records, and associating with inappropriate and/or violent individuals can be the basis for your asking for custody of your child.
Visitation With Your Child
If you simply seek visitation with your child, and you have no negative history which would prevent you from having visitation rights, the usual visitation regimen given by the Family Courts in New York is every other holiday, every other weekend, and one dinner during the week. Also, fathers are given access to the child on Father’s Day and the child’s birthday. In addition, the child should be entitled to telephone and Skype contact with the father on a regular basis.
Conclusion
Children have two parents. They should have relationships with both parents. This helps them grow up to be well meaning, well balanced adults.
