ATTORNEY ADVERTISING

Articles Posted in Child Custody

Child custody and support matters involve complicated legal issues that require the counsel of an experienced attorney. There are specific types of custody which have legal significance affecting each parents’ rights, responsibilities and the status of the children.  In any proceeding involving the custody of a minor child, the rights of both parents are equal.  It is the public policy of the State of New Jersey to assure minor children of frequent and continuing contact with both parents after they have separated and dissolved their marriage.  It is in the public interest to encourage parents to share the rights and responsibilities of child rearing.  Parents must be fully informed about the implications of custodial terms and what they mean.  A Court will normally grant joint legal custody unless one parent has been found to be unfit.  Unless a parent’s rights are terminated and someone else has adopted the child, the parent still is responsible for child support.

When entering into a custody agreement, parents must never assume that it can easily be changed.  If there is a significant change of circumstances and the parents are unable to agree on a change of custody including a change in parenting time or removal, an action is brought into Court.  This can entail a process involving expert witnesses and litigation.  In making an award of custody, the Court shall consider, but not be limited to the following factors:

a.  the parents’ ability to agree, communicate and cooperate in matters relating to the child;

b.  the parents’ willingness to accept custody and any history of unwillingness to allow parenting time not based on substantiated abuse;

c.  the interaction and relationship of the child with its parents and siblings;

d.  the history of domestic violence, if any;

e.  the safety of the child and the safety of either parent from physical abuse by the other parent;

f.  the preference of the child when of sufficient age and capacity to reason so as to form an intelligent decision;

g.  the needs of the child;

h.  the stability of the home environment offered;

i.  the quality and continuity of the child’s education;

j.  the fitness of the parents;

k.  the geographical proximity of the parents’ homes;

l.  the extent and quality of the time spent with the child prior to or subsequent to the separation;

m.  the parent’s employment responsibilites;

n.  the age and number of children.

REMOVAL

One question that regularly comes up is what happens when one parent wants to move away. Past judicial decisions require the custodial parent to demonstrate a benefit of the move before the Court will grant removal.  Other decisions have been based on whether the children will suffer from it.

The custodial parent must first establish a good faith reason to move out of State.  The Court will then determine whether the move is against the child’s best interests or if it will adversely affect the visitation rights of the non-custodial parent.  A reasonable visitation schedule will have to be developed.  It is a recognized factor that it is in the child’s best interest to have frequent contact with both parents.

Where neither parent was the primary residential custodian, custody to one parent will first have to be changed.  If there is no agreement, this will entail a best interest evaluation.  The parent who then becomes the parent of primary residence will have to go through the steps required for approval to remove the child.

In the case of Baures v. Lewis, an application to remove a child from the jurisdiction over the non-custodial parent’s objection, the Court looked to the following factors:  a.  reasons for move; b.  reasons given for opposition; c.  past history of dealings between parties insofar as it bears on reasons advanced by both parties for supporting and opposing move; d.  whether the child will receive education, health and leisure opportunities at least equal to what is available here; e.  any special needs or talents of the child that require accommodation  and whether such accommodation or its equivalent is available in the new location; f.  whether a visitation and communication schedule can be developed that will allow the non-custodial parent to maintain a full and continuous relationship with the child; g.  the likelihood that the custodial parent will continue to foster the child’s relationship with the non-custodial parent if the move is allowed; h.  the effect of move on the extended family relationships here and in the new location;  i.  if child is of age, his or her preference; j.  whether the child is entering his or her senior year in high school, at which point he or she should generally not be moved until graduation, without his or her consent; k.  whether the non-custodial parent has the ability to relocate; and l. any other factor bearing on the child’s best interest.

New Jersey’s Superior Court recently examined a case in which one parent’s decision to move to Florida and send her child to live with her father in the meantime was considered a “de facto” agreement to change the parents’ existing child custody arrangement.

welcome-to-florida-1484292Mother and Father divorced in 2009, following a 20-year marriage in which the couple had four children. They agreed to share joint legal custody of the kids, with Father assuming primary physical custody of the two boys and Mother assuming primary physical custody of the two girls. The couple’s younger daughter later went to live with Father. The couple had initially agreed to share physical custody of Daughter, but Mother moved to Florida about five months later.

Mother later asked a court to enforce the shared physical custody arrangement. She claimed that Husband had “encroached” on her relationship with Daughter and had refused to allow them to spend time together when Mother visited New Jersey. A trial judge denied the request. The judge tentatively ordered that Husband have primary physical custody and that Wife be allowed liberal visitation time. The judge also tentatively ordered Mother to pay Husband $100 per month in child support for Daughter. Mother’s attorney advised the judge that she agreed to the order, which then became final.

Continue reading

A number of tricky legal questions can come up when a couple with kids decides to divorce. These include how to handle a situation in which the parents split custody and one decides that he or she wants to move out of state. New Jersey’s Superior Court recently gave us a quick glimpse at how judges are expected to handle these cases.

childHusband and Wife separated in August 2013, following an eight-year marriage. They eventually entered into a marital settlement agreement, under which the parents shared joint legal custody and Wife was granted primary physical custody over the couple’s twin girls. Husband, meanwhile, got a “liberal” visitation arrangement in which his daughters stayed with him every other weekend, two or three weeknights per month, and on rotating holidays. The former spouses also agreed that they would try to live within a 15-minute drive from each other, that neither spouse would move more than 20 miles away from the other, and that neither spouse would move out of state without the other’s prior written consent.

Wife started a relationship with a man living in Utah shortly after Husband and she separated. She quit her job after the divorce, telling Husband that she intended to be a stay at home parent. Six months later, she told Husband that she intended to get remarried and move to Utah with the kids. Although Husband denied permission, a trial court granted Wife’s motion to relocate without holding a hearing on the matter. Instead, the court ordered the former spouses to come up with a new visitation schedule. When Husband refused to participate, the court granted a schedule based largely on Wife’s suggestions. Wife then permanently moved to Utah with the kids.

Continue reading

When a couple splits, they often go their own ways geographically. A new job, family obligations, or just the need for a fresh start are all good reasons to get out of town, but there are tricky legal issues that can come up if you’re sharing custody of your kids with an ex. New Jersey’s Superior Court looked at some of those issues in a recent case.child-at-beach-1554938

Husband filed for divorce from Wife in late 2013, following four years of marriage. They were originally married in India and relocated to New Jersey after having a child. Wife moved to Connecticut with the boy shortly after Husband filed for divorce, but then she relocated again to West Windsor, New Jersey. Husband then moved from South Plainfield to West Windsor to be closer to the child. The parties eventually agreed to share joint custody of their son, along with a 50/50 time share.

During the divorce proceedings, Wife said she received an offer to work for an Indian company in Charlotte, North Carolina. She asked the court to allow her to move there with her son. The trial court denied the request, finding that the move would not be in the child’s best interests. The trial judge said in particular that upsetting the even time split between the parents would not benefit the child.

Continue reading

Contact Information