SPARC Forums

Soc,

The ex filed for supervised visitation and pschy tests.  Court appointed a GAL - Agreed to tests and ordered ex to fully pay for tests and all transportation.  Ex refused to pay and wanted us to pay. GAL stated no, court stated no.

Ex then filed a motion to dismiss based on the fact that she could since she brought the case.  GAL is filing an objection due to the serious nature of the charges ex brought originially.  GAL states it is in the childs best interest to determine if the abuse EX alledges is true.

Attorney states that she can dismiss her own case and that he has never seen a Judge decline to dismiss.  GAL is filing an objection to dismissal.

1. Have you ever seen a Judge require a case to proceed based on the GAL when the party bringing the case does not want to proceed?  

Thanks

>1. Have you ever seen a Judge require a case to proceed based
>on the GAL when the party bringing the case does not want to
>proceed?  

Consider finding a different attorney. This is an action in equity, not law, and the court has broad discretion to act in the interest of justice once it obtains jurisdiction. Both parties are on an equal footing in an equitable action, and there is no judicial efficiency in dismissing a case, only to have you immediately refile the identical case under the identical facts currently at issue before the court.

Your attorney should object to the dismissal as not serving the interests of justice or the court or the child's best interests, and that it is merely a technical artifice to delay the inevitable litigated resolution of the matter.