50 mile rule

[spangle1033]

All parties in GA.

When the permanent custody paperwork was filed 2 years ago, DH's (NCP)  lawyer made sure to include the "50 mile rule" stating that if NCP and CP lived 50 miles or more apart, that the parties would meet halfway for all drop-off's and pick-up's involved in visitaiton.

This was due to the fact that at the time, CP was married (for the 3rd time) and had moved (with no notice whatsoever) to a town 200 miles away.

One week later, CP divorced her new hubby and moved back to NCP's town, so the rule was never put into effect.

2 years have passed and NCP has moved 50+ miles away.  During the first scheduled visitation after the move, CP tried every excuse in the book to keep from meeting NCP including, but not limited to: "We only have to meet half-way if I, the custodial parent, moves away", "We only have to meet half-way on major Holidays", "I'm going to get this rule changed soon so I'm not going to meet you half-way since it will be changed soon."  ETC., ETC.

After a few hours of this, we have a tape of CP stating "Well, I called my lawyer and you're right, I have to meet you.  It's in the paperwork."  That's verbatim.

Well, due to summer visitation and NCP happening to be in CP's town on the pick-up day a couple of times, CP only had to meet NCP half-way two times at this point.  Now that school is back in and NCP is back at work (he's a school teacher with summers off) it has finally hit CP that she will have to meet NCP on Fridays and Sundays and she is not happy.

This weekend (CP waited until 5 hours before the scheduled meeting)hours of texting, calling, and emailing ensued wherein CP claimed all manner of excuses for not meeting half-way including a vet appointment, a work appointment, etc.  CP wanted to "make it up later" and stated "I'll get you back next weekend."

When CP realized that the excuses weren't working, she resorted to "I've told you before, it doesn't state in the paperwork that I have to meet you, I was just being nice."

NCP rebutted and quoted her statement from months prior after she called her lawyer and she dropped it.  However, we're worried that she is going to stop meeting NCP and claim that she thought she was following the paperwork as she read it.

SORRY for the long intro....I was kind of confusing in my last message and wanted to be clear :-)

And before you answer my questions, I should include that the distance is too far for one person to travel twice in a weekend, so :-)

1.  If CP refuses to meet NCP half-way and later claims that she thought she was following the paperwork as she read it, can the tape we have of her admitting that NCP was right and she does have to meet him prove she's in contempt by knowingly not abiding by the order?

2.  Is there anything we can do if #1 does occur, besides going all the way back to court?

THANKS SOC!!

[socrateaser]

>1.  If CP refuses to meet NCP half-way and later claims that
>she thought she was following the paperwork as she read it,
>can the tape we have of her admitting that NCP was right and
>she does have to meet him prove she's in contempt by knowingly
>not abiding by the order?

The existence of a valid, enforceable court order stating the conditions of transfer of the child is all you need to demonstrate constructive knowledge for contempt purposes. The harder evidence to obtain is proof that she didn't meet you half way at the prescribed time and place.

Make certain you have a receipt from a business at the location where the pickup is to occur, showing the time and date that you were there.


>2.  Is there anything we can do if #1 does occur, besides
>going all the way back to court?

No.

[spangle1033]

All parties in GA.

When the permanent custody paperwork was filed 2 years ago, DH's (NCP)  lawyer made sure to include the "50 mile rule" stating that if NCP and CP lived 50 miles or more apart, that the parties would meet halfway for all drop-off's and pick-up's involved in visitaiton.

This was due to the fact that at the time, CP was married (for the 3rd time) and had moved (with no notice whatsoever) to a town 200 miles away.

One week later, CP divorced her new hubby and moved back to NCP's town, so the rule was never put into effect.

2 years have passed and NCP has moved 50+ miles away.  During the first scheduled visitation after the move, CP tried every excuse in the book to keep from meeting NCP including, but not limited to: "We only have to meet half-way if I, the custodial parent, moves away", "We only have to meet half-way on major Holidays", "I'm going to get this rule changed soon so I'm not going to meet you half-way since it will be changed soon."  ETC., ETC.

After a few hours of this, we have a tape of CP stating "Well, I called my lawyer and you're right, I have to meet you.  It's in the paperwork."  That's verbatim.

Well, due to summer visitation and NCP happening to be in CP's town on the pick-up day a couple of times, CP only had to meet NCP half-way two times at this point.  Now that school is back in and NCP is back at work (he's a school teacher with summers off) it has finally hit CP that she will have to meet NCP on Fridays and Sundays and she is not happy.

This weekend (CP waited until 5 hours before the scheduled meeting)hours of texting, calling, and emailing ensued wherein CP claimed all manner of excuses for not meeting half-way including a vet appointment, a work appointment, etc.  CP wanted to "make it up later" and stated "I'll get you back next weekend."

When CP realized that the excuses weren't working, she resorted to "I've told you before, it doesn't state in the paperwork that I have to meet you, I was just being nice."

NCP rebutted and quoted her statement from months prior after she called her lawyer and she dropped it.  However, we're worried that she is going to stop meeting NCP and claim that she thought she was following the paperwork as she read it.

SORRY for the long intro....I was kind of confusing in my last message and wanted to be clear :-)

And before you answer my questions, I should include that the distance is too far for one person to travel twice in a weekend, so :-)

1.  If CP refuses to meet NCP half-way and later claims that she thought she was following the paperwork as she read it, can the tape we have of her admitting that NCP was right and she does have to meet him prove she's in contempt by knowingly not abiding by the order?

2.  Is there anything we can do if #1 does occur, besides going all the way back to court?

THANKS SOC!!

[socrateaser]

>1.  If CP refuses to meet NCP half-way and later claims that
>she thought she was following the paperwork as she read it,
>can the tape we have of her admitting that NCP was right and
>she does have to meet him prove she's in contempt by knowingly
>not abiding by the order?

The existence of a valid, enforceable court order stating the conditions of transfer of the child is all you need to demonstrate constructive knowledge for contempt purposes. The harder evidence to obtain is proof that she didn't meet you half way at the prescribed time and place.

Make certain you have a receipt from a business at the location where the pickup is to occur, showing the time and date that you were there.


>2.  Is there anything we can do if #1 does occur, besides
>going all the way back to court?

No.