Topics

Following is an e-mail. You must read it from the bottom up so that things are in the right order.  I am not offering anything other than the e-mail.  I would like your comments regarding Mom and Dad.  

Thank you for your time.



From: Mom
Sent: Monday, March 15, 2004 8:56 AM
To: 'Dad'
Subject: RE: Overnights

I disagree with every thing that you stated. This is your opinion only nothing more. Son's braces were not broken when you picked him up as my father had taken him that Thursday and had them fixed. Son called me that Sunday from your home and asked that I make an appointment as his braces had broken again, I called and made the appointment and called you back with time so you could take him as you offered.  This e-mail has nothing to do with the children directly at this point as it is a past event so I will not respond to any of your accusations and harassments. You simply want to argue or you would not have put the last sentence on your e-mail. It is truly pathetic that you record all of the conversations, without my permission. I believe that it is illegal to record a telephone conversation unless the caller is notified to that effect. I hope that someday you get the help you need.

----HACKal Message-----
From: Dad
Sent: Friday, March 12, 2004 8:24 PM
To: 'Mom'
Subject: RE: Overnights
Importance: High

     You stated clearly and consistently that I am not showing you any consideration.  Not once in your prating did you address the issue of SON'S BEST INTERESTS.  This was and is about SON.  I changed my entire day around because Son was sick.  The only thing you did was give me grief.  During the recorded telephone conversation you never once asked me how Son was.  You only placed hurdles in front of me making it more difficult to work in Son's interests.  

     Finally, please provide specifics regarding your accusation of how you have been inconvinced over the last few weeks.  I picked Son up early last Friday because he was not feeling well and your parents had plans. I took him to the dentist to have his braces fixed (which were broken when I picked him up).  Seems like the more I do the nastier you get!

     Funny, I don't call these changes and accommodations necessary for Son's best interests inconsiderate, I call it parenting.

     If you choose not to respond, I will consider it to mean that you agree with everything I stated above.




From: Mom
Sent: Friday, March 12, 2004 2:53 PM
To: 'Dad'
Subject: RE: Overnights

I never said 8:00pm was not ok you said between 8-9pm and I said that was kind of late.

I never said I did not want to get up early I said I don't want him brought home that early in the morning I did not say why. Do not put words in my mouth.

Everything is always around your schedule I am never even taken into consideration whatsoever. You change plans show up late change times continually without a thought as to anyone else's schedule this is based on facts and has occurred a lot the past couple of weeks.

I will not respond to this subject any further.

----HACKal Message-----
From: Dad
Sent: Friday, March 12, 2004 2:47 PM
To: 'Mom'
Subject: RE: Overnights
Importance: High

When children are sick, plans naturally change.  I informed you prior to 8 am that he was sick and that I would contact you as soon as I could regarding the balance of the day and any necessary plan adjustments.

When I woke Son up this morning, he told me it hurt to move his head.  Your position that he could travel demonstrated a complete disregard for Son's well being.  

Further, your comments regarding my schedule again show a COMPLETE lack of consideration despite your claim to the contrary.

I told you on the telephone that I would confirm the return time as soon as I was able to solidify my schedule. Obviously that was not good enough for you!

When I suggested 8 pm YOU told me that is was not convenient.  I offered the alternative for tomorrow morning and you said you didn't want to have to get up early for that.

My suggestion that YOU come to get Son was based on the fact that you didn't like anything that I offered.  

To answer your questions directly:

1) Appointments; 2) appointments; 3) Son was Sick
 

________________________________________
From: Mom  
Sent: Friday, March 12, 2004 12:27 PM
To: Dad
Subject: Overnights

SON being sick today is another example of why overnights during the week are not a good idea. Even if Son was sick from school he should have been brought home this morning as you would have had to bring him to school anyway and since it is just a headache there is no reason that he could not have traveled. That way I could have arranged things this morning. You keeping him and not being able to notify me what time you will bring him home is totally inconsiderate. I am confirming to you that Son needs to be brought home tonight. Please notify me by 5:00pm as to what time that will be. Overnights during the week are not a good idea as things like this occur and I have to wait till the last minute to arrange my schedule. I do not ever make you wait till the last minute to tell you when you can get Son and not give you a specific time telling you that I will call and let you know. I show consideration to you. You should express that same consideration to me. As for your comment for me to come get him if I don't like the arrangements you are dictating, these overnights during the week were your idea and you are responsible for the transportation for this. Your extra parenting night was Thursday night and Son is to be returned on Fridays not Saturday mornings.  What is keeping you from bringing Son home sometime during the day as I could make sure my parents were available to be there for him? If you are not working, why can't you bring Son home sometime during the day? Why wasn't Son brought home this morning before school?

Dear Soc,  
I received the following e-mail from former spouse.  It is pertinent to the questions I have and hence have included it.  

Former Spouse Writes .....

 I have requested in the past on several occasions that you increase your parenting time with Son. Since July Son has only had 10 overnight visits with you. Son is refusing to stay at my home and is spending almost every night (with the exception of about 5 nights) at Friends house since the beginning of November apparently without any explanation as to why this suddenly occurred.

 I have exhausted all of my means of trying to talk with him and make him stay home. There have not been any huge blow ups at our home since August so why he chooses now to decide he does not want to stay home is puzzling to me. He will not even have a rationale discussion with me. I ask about homework and I am totally ignored. He swears at me on a regular basis. I feel very strongly that Son needs to be with a parent overnight on school nights.

Since he is refusing to stay with me I am asking that you keep him from now, beginning as soon as possible, until after Christmas break and school resumes again. I am desperately hoping that this will benefit Son immensely. I am desperate to help our son and if letting him stay with you for this time period will help him deal with what is going on inside him right now is best then I will certainly do whatever is best for Son. I love our son dearly and I will do whatever it takes to help him.

 I feel (as I have asked several time in the past) that Son should spend a lot more parenting time with you and perhaps that would help the situation once he has had time to settle down and think about things more clearly.

 I will agree to allow Son to stay with you temporarily from now until the 1st of the year when school resumes after Christmas break. I will only agree to this if I receive something in writing or e-mail from you agreeing to this arrangement. I will need to know when this situation will begin. I will also want it confirmed that this means that Son will be spending overnights with you and not left at a friend's house on school nights.

If you cannot agree to this arrangement that he not be left with a friend on school nights then there is no difference to what is going on right now and no change in the situation. I will also want to be assured that you will be totally responsible for him and that he will not be showing up at the house without my knowledge ahead of time. If you call me I can make arrangements to be home if Son needs to pick anything up from the house.

 Please confirm this arrangement as soon as possible so I will know how to proceed with Son if I will still be responsible for him. If I do not hear from you by Wednesday I will assume that things will remain as they are and that you will not be taking this parenting time opportunity to try to help our son. I feel that this would be a far better situation than to have you call protective services and have our son put in a foster home. I am asking for your help with our son so that he has the best chance possible to correct this situation.

 Son needs help dealing with his continuing anger problem and his total disrespect towards me. I have suggested counseling again but he refuses to even discuss this with me. Perhaps you can talk with him about this matter and have all of us go to counseling with him.  

 I will not consider this arrangement without written confirmation not verbal.
 Ex Spouse

=============================================

Additional Information,
 - Son is 15 and 8 months old

 - I have been and continue to speak with son nearly every night .

 - There have been physical altercations between Son and his step father – child protective services were involved and investigated but found no cause for action. Twice in the last 3 years

 - There is a mountain of motions to gain additional parenting time which were constantly fought by former spouse.  I have spent thousands of dollars fighting for additional parenting time so comments regarding requesting that I spend me time are incorrect and misleading.

 - Anger Management counseling was begun 3 years ago and stopped by former spouse because she had no trouble with son.  Former spouse actively resisted attempts to use the tools presented in the sessions.  I had trouble with Son 2 years ago and most of this according to counselor was backlash from parental fighting.

 - Although we are only 20 minutes apart, there is an international border between us.  This imposes significant challenges in the daily school commute.  Ex spouse knows this and is exploiting this border issue.   There are nights where Son will be required to stay at friends house to be in school the next morning.  I know the parents of Son's friend and am comfortable with the behavioral standards they impose.  

 - Case and jurisdiction is Michigan

 - I have responded that I will accept total responsibility for Son, without restrictions.  I have received no response yet.  

 - I will be expected to pay full child support as well as incur the additional transportation expenses for this temporary period.  I am not saying that I am not willing to do so, but just that I must.

==========================================

Questions

1)Is there enough in ex-spouse letter to demonstrate a change ion material circumstances regarding custody? In other words has the status quo been disrupted?

2) What types of petitions Should I consider filing with the court ?  


THANK YOU!!!

Hello soc,

BACKGROUND

Custody – Joint Legal with Primary physical to Plaintiff

Child had medical condition at birth that required multiple corrective surgeries from age 3 months to age 6.  Since that point annual follow-up has taken place with no surgical procedures necessary.  

From age 6 to present there has been acknowledgement that some fine tuning would be necessary by age 17.  Fine tuning includes some cosmetic scar reductions and realignment of the nose.  Also revision of the nose hole to improve air flow.

NONE of the tuning is necessary because of imminent health issues or concerns and can take place at a convenient time up to age 17.  In my discutions with the doctor, later is better because head growth will have finished.

Dependant Child will turn 15 in the next month.  Plaintiff scheduled annual follow-up appointment and scheduled this surgery to take place within the next months.  

This was done without consulting the Defendant

Defendant is in tenuous financial situation due to downsizing and job loss.  In short there is no possibility of covering Defendants portion of any uninsured / uncovered costs arising out of this procedure.

Child maintains regular visitation with defendant and both sees and lives with the necessary lifestyle changes resulting from job loss and change in family income.

When surgery was discussed between doctor and Plaintiff, and child was present (as should be the case). At that time, the child raised the issue of defendant's ability to pay and expressed concerns.  Over how defendant might pay.

There is no possible way Defendant can afford these expenses at this point in time.

CHild has also stated to Defendant that he is not certain he want to proceed because he does not know what he will do if he doesn't like the way the surgery turns out.

If family were in tact, there is no way the procedure would be considered at this time because of financials. AND there is no medical reason for the procedure to be performed now.  There are up to 2 more years.

Plaintiff has stated affirmatively that this time was chosen because it was most convenient for Plaintiff's work schedule and is adamant in the decision to move foreword NOW.

State of Jurisdiction is MI

This surgery is not considered routine medical care and as such case law supports the fact that both parents should have a say in the procedure.

Plaintiff stated that costs could be as high as $13,000.  


QUESTION

1) How do I proceed to delay the procedure?  

2) Can I write letters to the Medical Providers and state that I am unable to pay any costs associated with the procedures and I was not consulted in the decision process and will not be liable for any charges?

3) Any suggestions on how to deal with the loose-loose situation I am in?  I am bad for demanding a delay and I will get bad credit marks if I do not pay.  

4) It is possible for the Plaintiff to move foreword and pay all uncovered costs and then in turn demand repayment under the court order in place splitting all such costs.   By that I mean that the current order states " All uncovered / uninsured costs shall be split between the parties with Plaintiff paying XX% and Defendant Paying YY%.  Reimbursement for such out of pocket expenses shall be rendered to the paying party within 28 days of written notification of same.."  How can I protect myself from Plaintiff proceeding in this manner?

5) What is your opinion on haveing an open dicsussion with the child regarding the reasons I am asking for a delay?  Will the court look unkindly on me for engaging the child in that type of discussion?

Hello Soc,

     I have become successful is self representation thanks in latge part to your direct advice and input.  I say that I have become successful because, first I am winning and second, because, three times now attnys have approached me and asked me what firm i am working with.  

     The last time I was approached, after declairing that I am not an attny and am working pro per, the attny asked me for a contact number which I provided.  

     Today I received a call from that attny who asked me if i would be interested in doing research and document prep for estate planning and trusts.  Further discuyssion revealed that I would be interviewing clients, collecting information, then researching and preparing draft documents that would later be reviewed by the attny and ultimately filed as appropiate.  

     Suggested compensation was interesting, however, I am concerned that these activities may be bumping up against the line of practicing without a liscence.  

     All work will be reviewed by a liscensed attny, is that enough?  Work comes from Michigan, Indiana and Ohio.

so here is the question:  can a layman do all the work to prepare documents that will be filed in court under the supervision of a liscensed attny without crossing the legal line?

I hope the answer is yes ....

Blessings and Success

RCD

Hello Soc,

     Thank you in advance for your time.  State with jurisdiction is Michigan.  Issue is extraordinary health care expenses (dental in this case).

     Present order apportions payment for actual out of pocket responsibility for extraordinary health care expenses as Defendant (non custodial) 39% and Plaintiff (custodial) 61%.

     Child underwent orthodontic procedure.  Doctor billed each party separately.  Defendant was billed and paid 905.82 and plaintiff was billed and paid 992.50.  Subsequent to billing and payments, health care provider realized an error they made.  Said error was under billing health insurance company.  Provider has requested additional entitlement from insurance carrier in the amount approximating $233.

     Based on actual payments, defendant paid $165.48 over that which is established by the court order.  Note defendant was threatened with collections if the specified amount of 905.82 was not paid to the provider.

     Child required a root canal procedure durring orthodontic treatment.  Plaintiff paid entire amount of bill.  Plaintiff then submitted the uncovered expenses to defendant for reimbursement.  Defendant obligation (according to plaintiff and amount is not in dispute) amounted to 162.35.

     Defendant is stating that the overpayment to the first health care provider offsets the obligation to the second provider and the two amounts produce a small (3.13) credit to the defendant.

     Plaintiff asserts that the two matters are separate and is demanding payment forthwith.


Who is correct the plaintiff or the defendant?


Thank you in advance for your input

RCD


Note: these are not really big dollars, however, defendant lost employment and successfully defended against income imputation sought by plaintiff, and at this point, 160 dollars might as well be 160,000.  

Good Day Soc!

Basic Background

Plaintiff in case opined below retained the same attny for all three actions.

Defendant in case discussed below retained the same attny durring divorce action and subsequent fraud and conversion action.  New Counsel was retained to defend against the malicious prosecution action discussed below.  

Following is the OPINION OF THE COURT exactly as written

OPINION OF THE COURT
.
The Plaintiff filed a complaint alleging malicious prosecution against the defendant, his ex-wife, after her prior suit against him was dismissed upon the granting of his motion for summary disposition.
 
She filed suit against him, claiming that he fraudulently converted insurance proceeds which were obtained after his radio controlled cars and related equipment were stolen from his vehicle during the pendency of the divorce and so she was entitled to all of the insurance money.

At the time the plaintiff was attempting to obtain these insurance proceeds, the defendant wrote a letter claiming no knowledge or interest in the claim because she recognized that the stolen property belonged to him. The Court determined that she recognized that she had no claim to the insurance proceeds and, by her actions, authorized him to proceed with the claim on her behalf.

Trial was held and the defendant's attorney in the divorce and the first lawsuit to recover all the insurance proceeds was deposed. He testified that despite the fact that the plaintiff s attorney faxed him a copy of the letter written to the insurance company by his client, the defendant, he thought that she was entitled to one half of the insurance proceeds. He further advised her that she should file the lawsuit for conversion. Upon his advise, she directed him to file the lawsuit.

The Court has the impression that a lot of hostility existed between the parties during the pendency of the divorce and continued after it was final.

The Court is not clear but could reasonably speculate that the defendant's divorce counsel assisted in fanning the flames rather than providing any kind of moderating influence. Clearly, his advise to her about the "fraudulent" insurance claim entitling her to all of the proceeds was dead wrong and promoted erroneous dreams of her obtaining more money from her ex-husband. His erroneous advise cost both parties substantial attorney fees.

However, the law in Michigan is clear. If a party proceeds with a lawsuit upon the advise of his attorney after revealing or discussing all the relevant facts, this defeats one of the necessary elements to establish a malicious prosecution, lack of probable cause. Leeseberg v Builders Plumbing Co, .6 Mich App 321,328-9 (1967); Drouillard v Metropolitan Life, 107 Mich App 608,620 (1981).

Clearly, the defendant's attorney knew about her posture and attitude at the time the insurance claim was filed, but advised her to proceed with the unwarranted lawsuit anyway.

In view of the defendant's former attorney's testimony at his deposition, the Court concludes that the plaintiff has not shown by a preponderance of evidence that the defendant lacked probable cause to bring the conversion lawsuit even though the prior ruling indicated that she had no legal basis for filing the claim.

Therefore, a judgment of no cause for action must enter


ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

The court opined that Defendant waived attny client privilage when she advanced the advice of counsel defence and ordered that Plaintiff have the right to review all files regarding the divorce action and subsequent conversion suit.  

Durring trial and deposition, Defendant produced 13 documents into evidance which were not part of the files despite the fact that they were authored by the attny being deposed.  Further, correcpondance to the plaintiff's attny were also missing from the file suggesting that a purge took place.

The Judgement of divorce between the parties retained jurisdiction over property matters, yet defendant's first attny sought relief in circuit court.

When asked why that course of action was taken, he answered because he didn't think it was personal property.  Interestingly enough, durring the pendancy of the conversion trial, he sighted case law stating that a check is considered personal property of the desiginated payee(s)

Jurisdiction is MI

Questions

1) How do you interprate the language in the opinion regarding the defendant's first attorneys actions?

2) What actions do you suggest?

Happy holiday Soc!

     Formaer spouse demanded the following language be included in one of the many revisions to the original JOD.  Current Language states..." all abatements will be paid to the trust account of Defendants (that is me) Attourney XXX XXX XXX .... "  

     Since that order was entered I have gone pro per.  My former attorney stipulated that he would continue to accept the checks and send payment to me once the check cleared.  

     Twice in the last three weeks, former spouse has deposited money directly into my bank account and sent me an e-mail with the details of said transaction.  Unbeliveably, she has included my account number and banking institution in the un-encripted communication.

     After the first occurance, I told former spouse and her attorney that this was unacceptable and must stop.  Since it has occurred again, obviousely she has not stopped.

     Jurisdiction is Michigan

Question

 1) What can you suggest?

a

Happy New Year Soc!

FACTS

1) ABC sued me in civil court over property awarded to me in divorce judgement

2) Discovery / responsive pleadings took place.

3) Both ABC and I filed motions for SD

4) My original motion did not include a request for fees and costs but were requested in the oral arguments during SD hearing

5) Court tool matter under advisement for the reason that it did not review responsive pleadings prior to hearing

6) Court issued its opinion (see text below) and an order was entered (4/2003) denying ABC's SD motion and granting mine.

7) My answer to the original complaint included the following prayer for releif
          Wherefore Defendant prays: a) That the court dismiss the Plaintiff's Complaint; b) That  
          Defendant be awarded costs attorney fees and damages.

8) My original request for SD included the following prayer for relief:
          Wherefore, based on the foregoing and in reliance upon case law attached in Defendant's
          Memorandum Breif, Defendant prays that Plaintiff's Complaint be dismissed in its entirety
          for its failure to state a valid claim upon which relief can be granted and based on the fact
          that there are no genuine issues of material fact to be decided in the plaintiff's favor.

9) I filed a malicious prosecution complaint against ABC in 12/2003 after prevailing in my defense against her complaint.

10) Case is in michigan

11) ABC has entered the affirmative defense listed below

12) I submitted a motion for SD in the malicious prosecution action and served it with the initial complaint.




OPINION OF THE COURT

     This claim was filed by the plaintiff, seeking to recover the entire amount of an insurance check obtained by defendant, her ex-husband, as compensation for a theft loss, which occurred during the pendency of their divorce.  The loss occurred on or about 7/dd/yyyy when radio controlled cars and related equipment was stolen from the defendant's motor vehicle.  The divorce proceeding had been pending since 4/yyyy.
     
     The plaintiff, at the time worked at an insurance agency and had cancelled a homeowner's policy with AAA and obtained another through Citizen's insurance Company without informing the plaintiff.  At some point before the claim was paid, the plaintiff had caused the defendant's name to be deleted from the insurance policy.  This may have been because the divorce became final on 8/dd/yyy7.

     The pleadings suggest that it is undisputed that the plaintiff had told the defendant directly on or about 7/dd/yyy that she had not interest in his claim for the theft of the cars and equipment and would not assist him in furthering the claim and suggested that he could sign whatever was required to settle the claim.  She also wrote a letter to Citizen's Insurance Company indicating that she had no interest in the claim and did not wish to be involved.  The letter left the impression that the claim belonged solely to the defendant.  Since she referenced the claim number, it had surely been filed.

     The claim had to overcome more obstacles than a normal claim because the defendant's name was removed from the policy before it could be processed to completion.  It appeared strange to the claim processor that the person who was pursuing the claim was not a named insured.  Apparently steps were taken to put the defendant's name back on the policy, at least long enough so that the claim could be paid to both he and the plaintiff.  Ultimately, a draft was issued and sent to the defendant, naming both he and the plaintiff as insured.  The defendant signed both names on the back of the draft and deposited it.

     The plaintiff now disingenuously claims she is entitled to the entire amount of the draft.

     The court has reviewed the parties' judgement for divorce which indicates that they agreed on how they were going to divide up their personal property.  There appears to be agreement that the radio controlled cars and equipment belonged to the defendant and that the plaintiff had no interest in that avocation.  By the terms of the divorce judgement, this property belonged to him.  It is reasonable to conclude that the right to recover the insurance claim for the theft of this property also belonged to him.

     The plaintiff's statement to the defendant on or about7/dd/yyyy indicated that she recognized the insurance claim belonged to him.  Her letter dated 8/dd/yyyy to Citizens Insurance Company also supports this conclusion.  These actions lead to the conclusion that she authorized him as a joint insured to act on her behalf to process the claim so that she would not have to be involved and/or have any contact with him regarding the matter.  This authorization defeats any claim of forgery or conversion.

     The plaintiff has failed to state a claim upon which relief can be granted and her motion for summary disposition is denied.  The defendant's motion for summary disposition is granted.


AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (remember I am now the Plaintiff and ABC is Defendant)

1) plaintiff has failed to state a claim upon which relief can be granted

2) The applicable statute of limitations governing the claims of the plaintiff has elapsed and thus the claims of the plaintiff are barred

3) The principles of Res Judicata bar re-litigation of the issues raised in the complaint

4) Failure to file a motion pursuant to MCR2.119(f) with respect to relief granted in the referenced prior action

5) Failure to file a counter claim to the prior referenced action pursuant to MCR 2.203

6) Failure of the plaintiff to pursue costs pursuant to MCR2.625



ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

MCL 600.5805 Pertinent Sections
(5) The period of limitations is 2 years for an action charging malicious prosecution.
(9) The period of limitations is 1 year for an action charging libel or slander.

Rule 2.119 Motion Practice – subpart (F)

(F) Motions for Rehearing or Reconsideration.
(1) Unless another rule provides a different procedure for reconsideration of a decision (see, e.g., MCR 2.604[A], 2.612), a motion for rehearing or reconsideration of the decision on a motion must be served and filed not later than 14 days after entry of an order disposing of the motion.
(2) No response to the motion may be filed, and there is no oral argument, unless the court otherwise directs.
(3) Generally, and without restricting the discretion of the court, a motion for rehearing or reconsideration which merely presents the same issues ruled on by the court, either expressly or by reasonable implication, will not be granted. The moving party must demonstrate a palpable error by which the court and the parties have been misled and show that a different disposition of the motion must result from correction of the error.

Rule 2.203 Joinder of Claims, Counterclaims, and Cross-Claims

(A) Compulsory Joinder. In a pleading that states a claim against an opposing party, the pleader must join every claim that the pleader has against that opposing party at the time of serving the pleading, if it arises out of the transaction or occurrence that is the subject matter of the action and does not require for its adjudication the presence of third parties over whom the court cannot acquire jurisdiction.

(B) Permissive Joinder. A pleader may join as either independent or alternate claims as many claims, legal or equitable, as the pleader has against an opposing party. If a claim is one previously cognizable only after another claim has been prosecuted to a conclusion, the two claims may be joined in a single action; but the court may grant relief only in accordance with the substantive rights of the parties.

(C) Counterclaim Exceeding Opposing Claim. A counterclaim may, but need not, diminish or defeat the recovery sought by the opposing party. It may claim relief exceeding in amount or different in kind from that sought in the pleading of the opposing party.

(D) Cross-Claim Against Co-Party. A pleading may state as a cross-claim a claim by one party against a co-party arising out of the transaction or occurrence that is the subject matter of the original action or of a counterclaim, or that relates to property that is the subject matter of the original action. The cross-claim may include a claim that the party against whom it is asserted is or may be liable to the cross-claimant for all or part of a claim asserted in the action against the cross-claimant.

(E) Time for Filing Counterclaim or Cross-Claim. A counterclaim or cross-claim must be filed with the answer or filed as an amendment in the manner provided by MCR 2.118. If a motion to amend to state a counterclaim or cross-claim is denied, the litigation of that claim in another action is not precluded unless the court specifies otherwise.

(F) Separate Trials; Separate Judgment. If the court orders separate trials as provided in MCR 2.505(B), judgment on a claim, counterclaim, or cross-claim may be rendered in accordance with the terms of MCR 2.604 when the court has jurisdiction to do so. The judgment may be rendered even if the claims of the opposing party have been dismissed or otherwise disposed o


MCR 2.625 – please use this link  http://courtofappeals.mijud.net/rules/public/default.asp


QUESTIONS

1) Based on my understanding, by advancing an affirmative defense, the plaintiff ABC effectively admits that my allegations are true and that she even admits that I have established my prima facie case, however, she denies that I am able to recover on my claim for other reasons.  Is this understanding correct?


2) Isn't an affirmative defense and point #1 listed in the affirmative defenses above mutually exclusive?

3) I have quoted state statutes on statutes of limitations and I am well within the time alloted.  What is defendant referring to in her #2 point

4) Affirmative Defense points #4 through #6 all refer to actions associated with the initial case against me.  How do they / can they apply as a defense in My complaint for malicious prosecution against her.  

Protective Service Case worker at conclusion of investigation made the following statement to the children.  

..... If this happens again you will be taken from this house and put into a foster house ... you will not be sent to your NCP's house....

I was not there to hear the statement ...... so i must take it at face value

Question

1) Does this seem right to you?  

2) What insight can you offer?

 My son (age 12) has had 5 physical altercations with his step parent over the last 18 months.  They have been documented. Protective services have been involved in the last two instances.  One call he made himself and the second one I made.  None of the instances were severe.  Their intensity seems to be escilating.  

     When altercations have occurred I have demanded and received fromer spouses version of events.  Without fail all blame for the altercation is placed on my son.  

     My son does thrash out when his buttons are pushed.  He has addmitted to me that he has taunted hios step parrent which can lead to an intensification of the situation.

     Protective services recomended that my son receive counseling for anger subsequent to the time he phoned them.  I have documentation from the counselor that states my son confronted my former spouse over the badmouthing and critical comments directed at me.  Further, the documentation recorded confrontations between my son and former spouse over his desire to spend more time with me and former spouses refusal to permit the additional time.

     After the most recent occurance, my former spouse  e-mailed me and stated" I feel that it would be best if you came and got him for a least over the weekend if this is possible for you. ".  This was Thanksgiving weekend and was her holiday based on the existing court order.  

     I took my son back to my former spouse's house last night.  Within 40 minutes he was calling me telling me that he can come stay with me for the rest of the month (excluding the 5 days former spouse has durring Christmas Holiday).

     Extra parenting time has traditionally been like pulling teeth.
     Former Spouse has primary physical.  
     Son wants to come live with me.  I want that as well.  

     A protective services interview is scheduled at former spouses residance tomarrow.  The investigator plans a follow up telephone interview with me after that meeting.

     

Questions:

1) Is former spouse's consent to alow my son to come here for the entire month enough to establish that a substantial change in the established custodial environment has occurred?  

2) How much information should I communicate to protective services regarding counselors documentation and my observations of interactions in former spouses house?  I want the facts layed out but I don't want to come accross the wrong way.  

3) What other advice can/will you offer regarding this matter?