Second Evaluations

[Windd]

Custody evaluation(recommended and chosen by kids appointed attorney) completed several months ago which did not favor the mom. Mom and her attorney said evaluator lying, misquoted mother etc... Father's attorney provided response to courts with supporting documentation of reports, answering machine messages, etc....
Judge then gave okay for another evaluation to mom and her attorney. Kids attorney and father's attorney recommended kids be moved until 2nd  eval completed but judge did not agree. Two weeks later mom is moving within two miles of father and placing kids in school.

1)Has/can an evaluation ever be overturned just by "saying" we are/have  corrected the items the evaluator listed in the original report?

2)Is it appropriate and legally strategy to request second evaluation with intent on never having it do,ne but manuvering to correct deficiencies in initial report? Then coming to the courts and saying there are no problems anymore.

3) Will judge look kindly on request for another evaluation, having given his approval, and then it not be done?

It is obvious, at least to me, that the judge is giving mother every opportunity and more to correct mistakes and get it toghether. Mother is not on drugs or drinks but controlling as heck and extreme PAS.

4)Is there ever an appropriate way to handle a biased judge
From cases I have seen before he has been hard on but easy and forgivng on women.

[socrateaser]

>1)Has/can an evaluation ever be overturned just by "saying" we
>are/have  corrected the items the evaluator listed in the
>original report?

An eval is just evidence supported by expert testimony. You can choose to introduce the evidence and the witness or not. It's up to each party to choose/use evidence to their advantage, or to try to discredit evidence that is damaging to their case.

>
>2)Is it appropriate and legally strategy to request second
>evaluation with intent on never having it do,ne but manuvering
>to correct deficiencies in initial report? Then coming to the
>courts and saying there are no problems anymore.

If you can afford a second opinion when the first one is against you, then it's a good tactic.

>
>3) Will judge look kindly on request for another evaluation,
>having given his approval, and then it not be done?

The judge doesn't really care. He just wants you to settle so he can take the case file and throw it in the outbox, and then go back to watching "Days of Our Lives."

>4)Is there ever an appropriate way to handle a biased judge
>From cases I have seen before he has been hard on but easy and
>forgivng on women.

You can request that the judge voluntarily recuse himself on grounds of bias, or you can hire a private judge to oversee the entire affair, if your opponent will agree -- or you can settle.

[Windd]

The judge asked for the initial eval so it could help him make his decision, however he really did not make one other than to grant request for a second.  The kids attorney and father's attorney knew mom's attorney was evaluator shopping. The evaluator chosen, and documented in court,  to do the second eval was  to "expensive" in the mom and her attorney's wods. Now they say they have found someone else.

If the judge wants to throw in the outbox then what could be his rationale for allowing the continued delay by someone crying foul and then asking for another evaluation without the intent on ever having it done?

It is not a mockery of the court system for the judge to let this go on and waste time and money?

[socrateaser]

I try to tell this to people all the time, but it takes a LONG time to sink in.

The judge will do ANYTHING to stall if there's any possibility tnat the parties will settle the case. If he thinks that permitting a 2nd eval will give you more time to negotiate a settlement, then he'll do it.

His Honor gets paid the same amount of money, whether he hears 100 cases a month, or none at all. And, after the first six months of being a judge, he will have already heard just about everything that can possibly happen between two people, so hearing no cases is usually more interesting.

Anyway, the court isn't wasting any of the government's money, just yours and your opponent's, so the judge can argue that he's doing the taxpayers a service,  because most cases DO settle, eventually.

[Windd]

Custody evaluation(recommended and chosen by kids appointed attorney) completed several months ago which did not favor the mom. Mom and her attorney said evaluator lying, misquoted mother etc... Father's attorney provided response to courts with supporting documentation of reports, answering machine messages, etc....
Judge then gave okay for another evaluation to mom and her attorney. Kids attorney and father's attorney recommended kids be moved until 2nd  eval completed but judge did not agree. Two weeks later mom is moving within two miles of father and placing kids in school.

1)Has/can an evaluation ever be overturned just by "saying" we are/have  corrected the items the evaluator listed in the original report?

2)Is it appropriate and legally strategy to request second evaluation with intent on never having it do,ne but manuvering to correct deficiencies in initial report? Then coming to the courts and saying there are no problems anymore.

3) Will judge look kindly on request for another evaluation, having given his approval, and then it not be done?

It is obvious, at least to me, that the judge is giving mother every opportunity and more to correct mistakes and get it toghether. Mother is not on drugs or drinks but controlling as heck and extreme PAS.

4)Is there ever an appropriate way to handle a biased judge
From cases I have seen before he has been hard on but easy and forgivng on women.

[socrateaser]

>1)Has/can an evaluation ever be overturned just by "saying" we
>are/have  corrected the items the evaluator listed in the
>original report?

An eval is just evidence supported by expert testimony. You can choose to introduce the evidence and the witness or not. It's up to each party to choose/use evidence to their advantage, or to try to discredit evidence that is damaging to their case.

>
>2)Is it appropriate and legally strategy to request second
>evaluation with intent on never having it do,ne but manuvering
>to correct deficiencies in initial report? Then coming to the
>courts and saying there are no problems anymore.

If you can afford a second opinion when the first one is against you, then it's a good tactic.

>
>3) Will judge look kindly on request for another evaluation,
>having given his approval, and then it not be done?

The judge doesn't really care. He just wants you to settle so he can take the case file and throw it in the outbox, and then go back to watching "Days of Our Lives."

>4)Is there ever an appropriate way to handle a biased judge
>From cases I have seen before he has been hard on but easy and
>forgivng on women.

You can request that the judge voluntarily recuse himself on grounds of bias, or you can hire a private judge to oversee the entire affair, if your opponent will agree -- or you can settle.

[Windd]

The judge asked for the initial eval so it could help him make his decision, however he really did not make one other than to grant request for a second.  The kids attorney and father's attorney knew mom's attorney was evaluator shopping. The evaluator chosen, and documented in court,  to do the second eval was  to "expensive" in the mom and her attorney's wods. Now they say they have found someone else.

If the judge wants to throw in the outbox then what could be his rationale for allowing the continued delay by someone crying foul and then asking for another evaluation without the intent on ever having it done?

It is not a mockery of the court system for the judge to let this go on and waste time and money?

[socrateaser]

I try to tell this to people all the time, but it takes a LONG time to sink in.

The judge will do ANYTHING to stall if there's any possibility tnat the parties will settle the case. If he thinks that permitting a 2nd eval will give you more time to negotiate a settlement, then he'll do it.

His Honor gets paid the same amount of money, whether he hears 100 cases a month, or none at all. And, after the first six months of being a judge, he will have already heard just about everything that can possibly happen between two people, so hearing no cases is usually more interesting.

Anyway, the court isn't wasting any of the government's money, just yours and your opponent's, so the judge can argue that he's doing the taxpayers a service,  because most cases DO settle, eventually.