Stipulated Agreements

[oklahoma]

My husband and his ex signed and notarized a new parenting plan in September of last year.  The previous order said no visits until certain requirements were made, and my husband met all those requirements.  There were no attorneys involved.  We based the new parenting plan on the original one, making a few minor changes suggested by ex.  Ex agreed to file with the court, since we no longer live in that county.

I know it was stupid to trust her to do it, but we did and just found out that she never filed it.  She stopped allowing visits, and her attorney advised her to follow the previous order.  The attorney wrote a letter to the judge requesting that she not sign the new agreement.  We also sent a letter to the judge requesting that the order be signed, but have not yet been able to file it.

Question:
1. If we go ahead and file the agreement, can the judge really not sign it in as an order?

2.  If judge does not sign the new agreement, what is the best argument we have to get past that and get some parenting time going again?  Nothing happened from the time the new parenting plan was signed until ex stopped visits, and ex gave no reasons for stopping--just that she no longer agreed with parenting plan.

Thanks for your help....

[socrateaser]

>Question:
>1. If we go ahead and file the agreement, can the judge really
>not sign it in as an order?

Yes, if the court doesn't believe that the order is in the child's best interests, or that the order doesn't meet with the requirements of state law, then the judge can refuse to sign.

>
>2.  If judge does not sign the new agreement, what is the best
>argument we have to get past that and get some parenting time
>going again?  Nothing happened from the time the new parenting
>plan was signed until ex stopped visits, and ex gave no
>reasons for stopping--just that she no longer agreed with
>parenting plan.

Well, the fact that the other parent signed the agreement indicates, that she probably thought that what was agreed to was in the child's best interests on the date of signing. So, what has changed since that date? Nothing? Then why wouldn't what was agreed to then, be any less in the child's best interests than it was when the other parent signed?

That would be a pretty good argument.

What's missing in my analysis is the time delay. You haven't provided any dates for when these various events occurred. Your case will be weaker if you permitted the other parent to cut off visitation for several months and took no steps to maintain a parent-child relationship. This is because, you would be showing the court by your actions, that you believe that your visiting the child was not important to the child's interests.

So, if you let this drag on, then you had better have a very good reason for doing so, but even if you do, the court could still decide that if you don't care about seeing the child, then why should the court?