New York Family Law Blog
Sometimes, people have the knowledge and means to make law work in their favor. Take for example a case that was reviewed by a New York Family Lawyer about how two parents argue about visitation rights to their minor child. Primarily, the mother is seeking review to quash overthrow the “Shelter Hearing Order” made against her which forbids all forms of communication between her and their 11-year-old daughter. This decision was given by the juvenile court, which is the special body for trial and passing of judgment to minors who are involved in crimes and other issues involving children and adolescents.
This started out when the father who was a lawyer applied to permanently make himself the custodial parent of the daughter in 2000. Then the following year, the mother and the father agreed that they would share parental responsibility for their child and no one was to be designated a primary custodial parent among them. A Guardian Ad Litem, or an advocate who is appointed by the court on behalf of the child, along with the psychologist, and the trial judge all agreed upon and adopted the settlement agreement of the parties regarding visitation rights with their minor child several weeks after the main parties agreed upon a settlement. According to a Brooklyn Visitation Lawyer, about two months later, the father started a new lawsuit to temporarily suspend the mother’s rights to visit their child on the grounds that she made up stories and reports that he was abusing their child. He filed a report based on this and had the mother arrested.
She was arrested the day before she was to spend a long summer vacation with her daughter, which was what they have previously agreed upon. As a result, the mother’s visitation rights were reduced to supervised therapeutic visits and she sought to appeal this decision. A Bronx Custody Lawyer reports that the family court granted the father’s move and ordered the visitation rights to be modified. Then, he requested the DCF to file for a petition for dependency without the presence of the Mother and where the Department of Children and Families’ lawyer confessed that the claims contained in the Father’s petition were insufficient to take it into the DCF system. The after a few days, the DCF attorney dismissed the dependency case.