What to file???

[Imom]

When you say

>but you, or some other non-party must sign the cert .

>You must mail the copy and cert on the attorney BEFORE you file the originals with the court. ( I was coming back to ask about this....) because......

Every CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I have seen (dh has gotten or my friend) all are dated 1 day prior to the filing of a motion; however neither my dh or my friend were "sereved" they were only served after the motion was filed/stamped.

ie: they both have only ever received a copy of a motion/response from the opposing attorney after it was filed/stamped however the CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE stated they were served the day before; again though neither my dh or my friend have ever received anything unfiled/unstamped.




1. Does this mean dh must sign it? Or a totally third party....

2. If you mean a third party would I count (we are married so not for sure if it would be better to have someone else do so)?

3. Is he to serve this before its stamped by the courts?

[socrateaser]

>Every CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I have seen (dh has gotten or my
>friend) all are dated 1 day prior to the filing of a motion;
>however neither my dh or my friend were "sereved" they were
>only served after the motion was filed/stamped.

not for an ordinary motion, just for an order to show cause and for the original petition/complaint. an ordinary motion needs to be served first, then filed, although if you need a court date and time in advance for a notice of motion, then you need to get that before you serve.

>
>ie: they both have only ever received a copy of a
>motion/response from the opposing attorney after it was
>filed/stamped however the CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE stated they
>were served the day before; again though neither my dh or my
>friend have ever received anything unfiled/unstamped.

Well, if you do that, then you are effectively making a material falsification to the court, but if that's how they do it in your neck of the woods then be my guest. You could file the motion first, then serve, then file the cert, or you could do as is apparently the custom in your parts -- and lie (bizzare).

>1. Does this mean dh must sign it? Or a totally third
>party....

third party.

>
>2. If you mean a third party would I count (we are married so
>not for sure if it would be better to have someone else do
>so)?

any non party to the case may sign, so if you're not named in the caption of the case In re: matter of A and B (and you're not A or B), then you can sign.
>
>3. Is he to serve this before its stamped by the courts?

If it's an ordinary motion you can do this. If it's an Order to show cause, then you need the judge's order, which means it will be stamped in advance of service.

[Imom]

l

[Imom]

I havd had dh look up and print maps...from our home to bm's; from bm's to airport; from ours to airport. itineraries for up coming visits, unaccompanied mionr policies from a few airlines.

Bm's concerns are that of ss fling alone, "they" (airlines) don't watch the children as they say and children are coming up "missing" . IE the layover.

There are no direct flights from bm's to our airport.

I have done some research on the net about kids flying alone. I have come across some information about kids being flown to the wrong destinations "not missing" all 1998-August 2001. Before 9/11. But we think dh needs to be prepared as we believe bm/her attorney will bring some of these issues up.

Also Lets just say with the response filed (By the way dh loved) bm figures she will or is told to take ss to a therapsit/doctor to say he can NOT fly. With this being long distance we can not see them testifying; only bm stating they said this or that......or a letter sent  to the court from this therapist/doctor.

I know you can not read tea leaves......and its hard to say if they say this then you say this or if they say that then you say this....but if we could get dh started it would help him to figure out what to say next....

I have a few questions to start because we beleive for the most part they will be addressing the court.  Its part of a second set so it will be like 20-30mins.

1. What types of questions should dh ask bm ( should he just stick to questions like would you be willing to transport our child to the airport and place him on the plane)?

2. What should dh say if anything when/if bm states

     A) "she" does not feel comfortable with ss flying alone?

     B) the airlines do not watch children as they say they do?

3. What should dh say if anything if it is bm's attorney saying 2A (not that he feels uncomfortable but that bm does) and/or 2B

4. How should dh handle a situation if they enter such information like I came across about the children being flown to the wrong destinations?

5. What should dh say if anything when/if bm states the threapist/doctor xxxxx; states ss can not fly alone he is not mature enough?

    A) What should dh say if this therapist/doctor sends a letter/statement stating ss can not fly alone because he is not mature enough?

    B) On the off chance she does get a therapist/doctor to testify and he/she stated that ss can not fly alone because he is not mature enough....how should dh handle this.

[socrateaser]

>1. What types of questions should dh ask bm ( should he just
>stick to questions like would you be willing to transport our
>child to the airport and place him on the plane)?

If neither party asked the court for an opportunity to take testimony, then the entire hearing will be presented using the pleadings and evidence submitted in writing, and oral argument presented at the hearing. So, you may not get an opportunity to ask her any questions. I can't tell, cause I haven't read the pleadings.

>2. What should dh say if anything when/if bm states
>
>     A) "she" does not feel comfortable with ss flying alone?

Why not?

>
>     B) the airlines do not watch children as they say they
>do?

This is an objectionable conclusion. If either you or her attorney ask the mother "why not," as above, then you should immediately say, "Objection your honor, improper opinion. Move to strike."

A person can't just state that something is true without any supporting facts and expect the court to entertain the statement. If your ex is a flight attendant, then she may have expert knowledge as to the failure of the unaccompanied minor air transport system. Otherwise, she needs to hire an expert to testify to a claim as to what the airlines do or do not do.

So, you object and move to strike the testimony.

>3. What should dh say if anything if it is bm's attorney
>saying 2A (not that he feels uncomfortable but that bm does)
>and/or 2B

Your honor, opposing counsel is stating an improper opinion, unless he/she is an expert on airline transport procedure. Move to strike.

>
>4. How should dh handle a situation if they enter such
>information like I came across about the children being flown
>to the wrong destinations?

Objection, insufficient foundation -- hearsay.

>
>5. What should dh say if anything when/if bm states the
>threapist/doctor xxxxx; states ss can not fly alone he is not
>mature enough?

Objection, hearsay.
>
>    A) What should dh say if this therapist/doctor sends a
>letter/statement stating ss can not fly alone because he is
>not mature enough?

Objection, insufficient foundation -- hearsay.

>    B) On the off chance she does get a therapist/doctor to
>testify and he/she stated that ss can not fly alone because he
>is not mature enough....how should dh handle this.

There is no "off chance." If such a witness is contemplated, then the other attorney must inform you, otherwise you can ask for a continuance so as to prepare to meet the witness' testimony, or in the alternative to prevent said testimony. There should be a return of service in the court file for every witness who is to be called as part of the other party's case, unless the witness is called to impeach some testimony or evidence admitted by you during your case.

However, you have raised the issue of whether or not there are any direct flights. This is, in my opinion, a reasonable concern. You need to get documentary evidence of your proposed airline's actual procedure to be followed in the event that the child's flight connection cannot be made, and how the airline will transfer the child between flights, if this is the required process (vs. merely a nonstop flight where the child remains on board the same plane during a intervening stop).

You should ask the court to take "judicial notice" of the policies contained in these official airline documents. They are ordinarily hearsay, but unlike some anecdotal report of a child not arriving at a destination,"The airline policy is a statement of policy from the airline itself, as to its method of ensuring the safety of an unaccompanied minor passenger, and as such, it is not subject to reasonable dispute and is easily verifiable."

The quoted words are the words you should use in your request for judicial notice of the airline policy.

This really isn't a difficult case if you present adequate evidence. The issue is (1) is it generally safe for any child of comparable age and maturity to fly under the proposed conditions, and (2) is there any reason why this particular child should be restrained from flying? The answer to #1 is a pretty easy no if you have the airline policy available for the court to consider. The answer to #2 is debatable, but unless this child has some history of panic or psychological/physical disorder, or unless an expert testifies as to some concrete reason why the child shouldn't fly, then there's no reason why not to allow the flight.

Frankly, this whole thing is a bit bizarre. I have confronted the issue of no nonstop flights before, however, the solution is to pay the unaccompanied minor fee so that the airline will take responsibility. The mother's attorney seems to be making an unreasonable objection, based on your posted facts. But, maybe there's something else that I'm unaware of.

[Imom]

Thank you.

These questions are what if's.

BM's concerns that I have stated are ones she stated directly to dh.

In her motion to appear by telephone it states;

MOTION TO ALLOW XXXXXXX XXXXX XXXX TO APEAR BY TELEPHONE

xxxxxxx xxxxx xxxx, by her attorney xxxxx xxxxxxx, request the Court allow xxxxxxx xxxxx xxxx to appear by telephone for the hearing scheduled for August 11, 2005 at 11:00 o'clock, which is to consder whether the divorce decree herein should be modified, at the request of xxxx xxxxx xxxxx, xx. for the 9-year-old son of the party to return to xxxxxxxxx alone by airplane, rather than automobile with father.

       In support of the motion, xxxxxxx xxxxx xxxx presents to the Court that she lives in xxxx, xxxxxxxxxxx, 596 miles away, and does not have the financial means to travel to xxxxxxxxx, xxxxxxx for the hearing.
     
      Wherefore, xxxxxxx xxxxx xxxx request that the hearing be held in the Judge's chambers and she be allowed to participate by telephone.

So, with that she rasied the issue of ss's age and flying alone. So we are assuming this is what they will be bringing up plus we are sure they will bring up the concerns with layovers.  

[Imom]

I can not post to many details becase I can not stay away from the "third" party issue.

Court did not go well at all.....the judge did not make a ruling yet as there is no emergency at this time....(he has 90 days)....he stated he wanted to research some things on his own.

In a nut shell I beleive he is going to order to meet halfway which still requires the same amount of driving and fuel expense.....he did not seem to keen on the flying either.

(BTW he did deny the petitioner's request to appear by phone......because he does not have access???......bm did show up, but her attorney did not....the judge was shocked he did not and she did....)

[socrateaser]

>I can not post to many details becase I can not stay away
>from the "third" party issue.
>
>Court did not go well at all.....the judge did not make a
>ruling yet as there is no emergency at this time....(he has 90
>days)....he stated he wanted to research some things on his
>own.
>
>In a nut shell I beleive he is going to order to meet halfway
>which still requires the same amount of driving and fuel
>expense.....he did not seem to keen on the flying either.
>
>(BTW he did deny the petitioner's request to appear by
>phone......because he does not have access???......bm did show
>up, but her attorney did not....the judge was shocked he did
>not and she did....)

Thanks. I believe that you are underestimating the judge, based on your post. The way that I read it, I think you're gonna win, and the fact that the attorney didn't show is a BIIIIIG deal to the court.

So keep yer fingers crossed.