Queens

Published on: August 10, 2012

Parent Requests to Take Child Out of State

by Stephen Bilkis

The problems that arise when a family is divorced are endless. Not only do the parents separate and create new homes, but the children have to divide their time between two parents. When a divorce is finalized, a visitation schedule is created. A New York Family Lawyer said parents are required to create a visitation schedule and the courts ensure that the parents remain in compliance with the orders of the court. However, life is rarely a stagnant existence. Changes occur in every person’s life that can affect the application of a visitation schedule.

One of the most common changes to affect a parent’s life involves having to move to another state. Whether a person has to relocate for business, or personal reasons, if that person is divorced with children, the visitation schedule will have to be reviewed by the court. In fact, if the parent who is moving to another state is the primary custodial parent, it can even affect the move. A primary custodial parent must apply to the state of New York family court for permission to move with the child. The courts of New York strive to ensure that the best interests of the child or children is the most important issue that must be addressed.

When the non-custodial parent objects to the move, things can get even more complex. In one case that was heard before the New York State Supreme Court of Nassau County on October 26, 1998, a mother was transferred to a different state and applied to the court for permission to take her child with her. A New York Custody Lawyer said her ex-husband objected and countered the motion with one of his own. His motion was to have primary custody of the child transferred to him and a new visitation arrangement drawn up so that the mother could have limited visitation. On January 29, 1998, the mother’s request to move with the child to the state of Florida was denied. The mother had to fight for ten months to have her case heard on appeal. Ten months is a very long time when your job and your ability to keep your child is at stake. Finally in October, the Supreme Court of Nassau County prepared to hear her appeal of the trial court’s decision to deny her request to move with the child to Florida.

Published on: August 7, 2012

For Custody, Court Looks at Welfare of Children First

by Stephen Bilkis

Jurisdiction is an important issue in child custody hearings. Often the parents of the child live in different court jurisdictions, or even different states. The courts must work with the parents to determine which court system will have jurisdiction over the matters that are involved in each case. In one Suffolk County case, the parents’ divorce was finalized in the Nassau County Family Court in 2002. A New York Family Lawyer said the following that action, the mother was granted primary custody of the child of the union. She relocated to Suffolk County.

Since the time that the divorce was finalized and the mother moved to Suffolk County, the Suffolk County Family Court has handled at least one motion to adjust the visitation schedule that the couple had in place to manage the visitation of the child. In 2008, the father of the child made a motion to the Nassau County Family Court to change primary custody over to him. The mother filed a cross-motion to deny the father’s motion and to have all jurisdiction over future motions transferred to the Suffolk County Family Court. A New York Custody Lawyer said the mother maintains that the father has moved to Suffolk County in the years since the divorce was finalized. That means that at the time of this particular motion, the mother, father, and the child are all living in Suffolk County and no one is living in Nassau County.

The Supreme Court reviewed the motions and determined that the proper venue of any motions in this case would be the Suffolk County Family Court. They contend that since all concerned parties are living in Suffolk County, it only makes sense that the court system to handle their case should also be Suffolk County. The court also appointed a Law Guardian for the child.

Published on: August 5, 2012

A Child’s Relationship with Both Parents Important in Custody Issues

by Stephen Bilkis

Whenever a couple faces a divorce, they must also face custody decisions that involve the children of the marriage. A New York Family Lawyer said the love that a parent has for their child is the greatest love that exists on this planet. To require that the time that they spend with that child be split with another person is heart wrenching. This is especially true if the child is very small. It is not natural for a parent to spend time away from their child. Emotions run high and people who at one time loved one another enough to create a child, become mortal enemies in the quest to have all of the time that they can get with that child. Child custody disputes change people forever.

The court system of New York recognizes this problem. They strive to ensure that the welfare and security of the child is the most important consideration. The court appoints an attorney for the child or children that serves as a buffer for the children and the court. This attorney listens to the child and addresses his or her concerns during the custody hearing. It is the objective of the court to ensure that the children are considered. If the parent that the child is spending most of the time with is not given primary custody, it can have devastating effects on the psyche of the child. Toward this goal, the court strives to create an environment where the child’s life and lifestyle is altered as little as possible by the decision of their parents to obtain a divorce.

The court system also strives to ensure that the child is encouraged to maintain a nurturing relationship with the non-custodial parent as well. A New York Custody Lawyer studies in recent years have demonstrated that children who are not allowed to foster a nurturing relationship with both parents whether divorced or not, do not have the benefits that are afforded to other children. When one parent is so bitter toward the other parent that they wage war on them through the children, the courts of New York will step in to remove custody from that parent. In the courts of New York, the custodial parent is entrusted with the difficult task of acting like an adult when it comes to handling the relationships of the child and the other parent. It is a sorry affair when a parent attempts to turn the child against the other parent in a divorce. A divorce is an action that is taken by the parents usually based only on the relationship that the parents have with each other.

Published on: August 4, 2012

The parties were both born in Albania

by Stephen Bilkis

The Facts

The parties were both born in Albania. On 14 December 1989, plaintiff first moved to the United States after receiving a green card through the American Embassy in Belgrade, Yugoslavia. In 1997, he became a United States citizen. Plaintiff lived and worked in the United States continuously from late 1989 until the date of the commencement of the herein action, only returning to Albania for brief vacations over the years, approximately the first six years of the marriage. A New York Criminal Lawyer said the plaintiff is 48 years of age and defendant is 36 years of age. Plaintiff first returned to Albania in 1992, at which time the parties began to date. The parties became engaged when plaintiff returned to Albania for a six week visit in 1993.

Sometime in September 1995, the parties got married in a civil ceremony in Albania after a two year engagement. Defendant lived with plaintiff’s family after the marriage but plaintiff returned to the United States where he was working six weeks after the marriage.

Published on: August 2, 2012

The Administration for Children’s Services (ACS) filed an abuse petition

by Stephen Bilkis

The Administration for Children’s Services (ACS) filed an abuse petition, pursuant to Family Court Act against the respondent mother and the person legally responsible for the subject children, respondent R., with regard to the children of the respondent mother.

A New York Family Lawyer said ACS alleged in their petition that a fifteen-month-old child was in the care and custody of respondent R. and that the toddler was returned to the respondent mother with two black eyes and swelling to his forehead. It was alleged that the toddler and his eleven-year-old sibling left Brooklyn with respondent R. to go to his home in New Jersey for the weekend. Later that same day, the younger child was brought to the hospital and was pronounced dead on arrival. Significantly, despite her brother and sister accompanying her to New Jersey when she learned of her child’s death, respondent mother chose to spend the night with respondent R. in his home, with eleven-year-old Sheila who was present at the time of Angel’s death, knowing R. was a suspect for the homicide of her son that day.

ACS further alleged that despite knowing of these injuries and even documenting these injuries with a camera on her cell phone, the respondent mother failed to seek any medical attention. A New York Custody Lawyer said the ACS effectuated an emergency removal of the surviving children upon the death of the toddler. Subsequently, respondent mother gave birth to another baby. ACS sought for the child’s custody. A New York Custody Lawyer said the Court determined that the temporary removal of the infant was necessary to avoid imminent risk to this child’s life and health.

Published on: July 30, 2012

Court Decides Custody in Light of Abuse Allegations

by Stephen Bilkis

Child visitation issues in divorce actions are reliant upon the agreement of the parents, cooperation from the children, and decisions of the courts. A New York Family Lawyer said the court of New York strives to enhance the relationships of the children with their parents. However, it is not always possible for everyone involved in the situation to continue to foster a positive relationship with each other.

Many factors affect the outcome of custody decisions in the courts of New York. When a custody issue is shadowed by domestic violence, it can be even more difficult to ensure that the children continue to have a good relationship with both of their parents. When domestic violence issues are involved, the rights of the parents to have visitation with the children becomes secondary to what the court determines is in the best interest of the child. If the child would be endangered by contact with the abusive parent, then any positive benefits from visitation would be countered by the negative effects of the contact with the abuser.

This is especially true when the courts have ordered that the abuser is prevented from contacting the child or the other parent because of a protective order issued by the court. When the court determines that a protective order is necessary to protect the family members, it changes all of the rules. A New York Criminal Lawyer said protective orders are necessary to ensure the safety of family members when one or more of the parents have been charged with offenses related to domestic violence. Offenses that are included in most domestic violence laws include but in most cases are not limited to offenses related to physical assaults, such as simple assault, aggravated assault, and assaults against minors or the elderly. They include offenses related to battery, such as simple battery, aggravated battery, and battery against minors or the elderly. Some states have laws against criminal trespass that include property damage that is less than $500 in value, or going onto a property without the consent of the owner or remaining on a property without the consent of the owner. There are numerous other offenses that relate to domestic violence such as stalking, aggravated stalking, harassment, harassing phone calls, and other offenses that are used in domestic situations to instill fear in the other members of the family.

Published on: July 25, 2012

Father Petitions Court to Take Child Out of the Country

by Stephen Bilkis

When child custody issues involve a parent who is not native to the United States, the court is forced to deal with additional issues that are not common among domestic cases. Many countries do not respect divorce proceeding rulings from outside of their borders. A New York Custody Lawyer said that means that it is unfortunately fairly common for one parent to abscond with a child to a different country. It becomes very difficult for the other parent to regain visitation with that child when they have been taken overseas. In order to prevent this type of parental abduction, courts work to create reciprocal agreements with other countries. However, not all countries are willing to comply.

Patriarchal countries are often non- compliant when faced with the concept that the mother of a child has a right to the child against the will of the father. In cases of that nature, it can become almost impossible for the mother to obtain the child. For this reason, some mothers will actively take steps to prevent a father from a patriarchal country from removing the child from the United States. In one case of this type, the mother refused repeatedly to obtain a passport for her minor child to accompany her father outside of the United States. A New York Family Lawyer said the father made an application to the court to have the mother obtain a passport for the child and to enable him to take the child back to his homeland to meet his family overseas. There is no other implication that the father might be a threat to abscond with the child.

However, it is important to ask why the mother was resistant to the notion of the father taking the child overseas. The mother is more familiar with the ability of the father to abscond with the child than the court is. A Nassau County Family Lawyer said he must assume that she presented more evidence about her concern for allowing the father to take the child overseas than is recorded in the documents of the case. However, one must also assume that the court heard both sides of the argument and was able to review the risk involved that the father will not return to the jurisdiction with the child.

Published on: July 20, 2012

visitation

by Stephen Bilkis

Divorce creates many situations within a family that cause difficulties. In New York, the goal of the court system is to ensure that the children do not suffer because of the conflict between the parents. A New York Family Lawyer said no matter how much a court system may attempt to ensure that the children do not suffer from the stresses of the parents, it is impossible to achieve this goal entirely. In many cases, the parents do not stay in New York and one may move to a different jurisdiction. When this happens, the parents along with the court must decide if they are in a position to continue to handle the court issues of visitation and support through the New York court system.

One case from 1999, concerned the ongoing issues of a family going back more than ten years before the case was discussed in New York Family Court. The couple were married in Buffalo, New York on June 21, 1987. In 1988 and 1990, they brought two children into their marriage. The couple resided in New York City and Long Island while they both attended college. Toward the end of their marriage, they moved to Hamilton, Massachusetts. They were separated on December 21, 1993, and divorced in 1995. The couple agreed that the children would live with their mother in the family home in Massachusetts and the father moved to a townhouse near the home. In 1995, the mother moved to Buffalo, New York with the two children. The couple agreed that the Massachusetts Family Court would continue to have jurisdiction over the divorce decree and the continuing issues of visitation and support with the children. However, as both parents moved on with new families of their own, additional issues have arisen.

The final divorce decree created in Massachusetts allowed that the children were the full custody of the mother with the father being allowed liberal visitation. However, the father remarried and began a new life with his new wife and stepdaughter in Ipswich, Massachusetts. The mother met a man in New York and later moved with him and the two children from her previous marriage to Oregon. The father at that time filed for the children to rejoin him in Massachusetts. The issue of the court became a situation in which the father stated that he was being expected to spend too much money visiting the children in Oregon, or having the children flown out to visit him in Massachusetts. A Queens Family Lawyer said the case was brought before the New York Family Court in which they agreed with the father and ordered that the child support payments that the father was ordered by the Massachusetts Court to make, should be put into a separate banking account and used to pay for the expenses of visitation and plane fare. The mother filed an appeal.

Published on: June 24, 2012

Court Discusses Modification of Visitation Schedule

by Stephen Bilkis

A married couple who resided in New York filed for a divorce and was granted a decree of divorce in January 18, 1980. The decree or divorce granted the custody of their common child to the wife while giving the husband a visitation schedule.

A New York Family Lawyer said the father took full advantage of his visitation rights and cultivated a good relationship with their daughter despite the divorce. The child also began a close relationship with her grandparents on her mother’s and father’s side.

Sometime in 1987, the mother applied for a modification of the visitation schedule in the divorce decree. The mother claimed that she has obtained employment in Tennessee and would like to relocate there with her child.

Published on: June 22, 2012

Does Re-Marriage Justify Change in Custody?

by Stephen Bilkis

A couple was married in New York sometime on April 7, 1979. They had a daughter who was born on November 28, 1980. A New York Family Lawyer said tht two years after their daughter was born, the woman sought a divorce from her husband. The woman was granted custody of the child while the divorce case was being heard.

In February 24, 1983, the mother and father made oral stipulations where the parties agreed that their daughter will remain with the mother and the father will have liberal visitation rights.

The order of divorce was honored by the mother and the father except for some instances when the mother took her daughter to the Bahamas for a vacation in 1985. A New York Custody Lawyer said while on vacation there, the mother met a Canadian who was also divorced and had two sons. The Canadian was a resident of Montreal where he had a business.