Change in Custody

[codyspony]

All proceedings in Florida, however CP in Georgia, NCP (me) in Florida.

We have been now been in court proceedings for almost a year now.  We are getting ready to go into depositions and mediation soon.

I filed for modification of custody due to mother's contempt of visitations, for which I received makeup visitation for.  Child is in Kindergarten and not doing well, missing school, sick, tardy.  Lots of other things going on but too detailed to even mention.  

My question is:

What are depositions for if the parenting evaluation is already completed?

Also, if there are blatant untruths that are quoted by the evaluator based on information from the other party, can a motion be set forth to strike the evaluation, provided that evidence is given at the hearing of that motion if indeed that can be done?

If the evaluation is striken due to inconsistencies of testimony (that isn't the right word), would a new one be ordered?  And would the evidence in the first evaluation be given to the 2nd evaluator?

As for change in custody modifications, I understand it takes a lot for judges to change custody, but in your opinion have you ever found that judges get lost in too much detail and take the easy ways out?

Out attorney suggested that we have so much evidence on the other party, that the judge wasn't smart enough to navigate through the muck.  That just doesn't seem right.  Almost as if he (the attorney) is giving up.

Thanks.

[socrateaser]

>All proceedings in Florida, however CP in Georgia, NCP (me)
>in Florida.
>
>We have been now been in court proceedings for almost a year
>now.  We are getting ready to go into depositions and
>mediation soon.
>
>I filed for modification of custody due to mother's contempt
>of visitations, for which I received makeup visitation for.
>Child is in Kindergarten and not doing well, missing school,
>sick, tardy.  Lots of other things going on but too detailed
>to even mention.  
>
>My question is:
>
>What are depositions for if the parenting evaluation is
>already completed?

Apparently, one or both attorneys find the evaluation less than dispositive on the major issues. Otherwise there would be little need for further evidence to narrow the scope of issues in the case.

>Also, if there are blatant untruths that are quoted by the
>evaluator based on information from the other party, can a
>motion be set forth to strike the evaluation, provided that
>evidence is given at the hearing of that motion if indeed that
>can be done?

Yes, but unless both parties agree to limit or eliminate the report, the judge is likely to allow the report subject to cross examination of the evaluator on specific issues at trial.

>
>If the evaluation is striken due to inconsistencies of
>testimony (that isn't the right word), would a new one be
>ordered?  And would the evidence in the first evaluation be
>given to the 2nd evaluator?

A new report would be likely, and not likely based on any prior info.

>
>As for change in custody modifications, I understand it takes
>a lot for judges to change custody, but in your opinion have
>you ever found that judges get lost in too much detail and
>take the easy ways out?

lol. You're kidding, right? Haven't you been watching this farce with Anna Nicole Smith?

>Out attorney suggested that we have so much evidence on the
>other party, that the judge wasn't smart enough to navigate
>through the muck.  That just doesn't seem right.  Almost as if
>he (the attorney) is giving up.

The hazard of alleging that the other parent is unfit, vis-a-vis ignoring the other parent's bad traits in favor of emphasizing your good points, is that all of the court professionals (judge, evaluators, etc.) may view you as hostile, simply because you are finding fault with the other parent, and thus you are found the less fit parent.

I usually recommend that you don't denigrate the other parent at all, and merely emphasize your strong points. That way the other parent appears hostile and vindictive, while you appear as only interested in the child's interests, regardless of whether or not it hurts or help your case.

The judge then thinks that because you are willing to lose your case to favor the child, that the other parent is mentally ill for saying anything bad about you, and suddenly you have the edge.

I suggest that you completely change your trial plan, because what you are doing is not working.

[codyspony]

Yes, the whole Anna Nicole situation brings the trial/court system to a laughing matter...and embarrasing since I live in Florida.

I agree wholeheartedly about the whole denigrating the other parent...however, it has worked for the other party much to my surprise.  

That within itself was a big blow and unfortunately after speaking again with his teacher, who I once thought was very biased against me due to the other parent, has begun to turn her own attitude around as I refused to maintain every conversation about the child instead of a he said/she said.

Thanks for your time.  We will continue to work our attitude to our advantage.  

One last question (for now):

As for witnesses at trial are the teachers considered good witnesses?  Since they see the child everyday, interact emotionally and educationally?  Unfortunately she is out of state, but wonder if she could be a witness via telephone?

THANK YOU!

[socrateaser]

>As for witnesses at trial are the teachers considered good
>witnesses?  Since they see the child everyday, interact
>emotionally and educationally?  Unfortunately she is out of
>state, but wonder if she could be a witness via telephone?

A witness in a final hearing via telephone violates due process, because of the difficulty in ensuring that the person is who he/she says they are and is testifying voluntarily.. That it occurred in Anna Nicole's case was a TV stunt by a judge who was playing for the cameras in my opinion.

You're not gonna get that to happen. So, you will either have to pay the witness to testify, or depose him/her in the other state, and bring the transcript to court with you.

Of course if the other parent were to consent to a telephone appearance, then the judge would probably allow it. But, based on your posted facts, agreement between parties ain't likely.