Custody Actions must be in the Home State
February 2nd, 2017
In order for a person to initiate a custody battle, the person must file in the child’s home state. Determination of the home state depends on the place where the child lives or has lived for a majority of the child’s time.
If you are needing assistance fighting a divorce or custody battle, contact our law office at 816-524-4949 or visit our website at www.hoorfarlaw.com.
Follow Your Family Plan
July 25th, 2016
It was recently found that a violation of a custody, visitation, or support order can be cause to incur a penalty. Since this type of violation can be refuted by a good cause defense, the fine is not pre-set. The amount of the fine will be determined after any defense is heard. If you have violated a family law order, contact our office at 816-524-4949 or check out our website at Hoorfarlaw.com.
Picking a State to Determine Custody
March 31st, 2016
Missouri law states that only the courts of the home state can determine custody arrangements. If you are facing a custody battle and you need assistance determining your home state or assistance in court, contact our office at 816-524-4949 or www.Hoorfarlaw.com.
Custody and Relocation
June 19th, 2014
There is currently no Missouri law that requires a parent with custody of a child to file a motion to relocate with the court. Instead, the parent only needs to file a notice of relocation and that notice can be challenged by the other parent. Once sixty days has passed after the notice has been given, and no challenge has been filed, then the child can be relocated without court intervention. To learn more, check out this case: Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District- ED100424
Visit our website at www.Hoorfarlaw.com.
Child custody judgment set aside because custody routine the parties had used pendent lite led the father to believe a judgment consistent with that schedule would be entered. Lewis v. Lewis, No. 31663
November 6th, 2012
This was an action for dissolution of marriage in which a default was taken against the Father. He sought to have the judgment set aside, but the trial court denied his request. The Parenting Plan entered gave the parties joint legal and physical custody with the cornerstone physical custody of the Father being every other weekend. However, he had to work on Friday, Saturday and Sunday in alternating months. During the pendency of the case, his work schedule had been accommodated. He was led to believe a Parenting Plan would be set in similar fashion. The Parenting Plan of the default judgment effectively eliminated his weekend time for six months of the year unless the Mother acceded a variance therefrom.
Soon after the entry of the default the Mother refused to work around the Father’s work schedule. The trail court noted that the Father could always seek a modification of the judgment if this persisted. The Father’s request for the judgment to be set aside was denied. Father’s appeal followed.
Held: Reversed. “A work schedule that does not allow for meaningful parental contact six months of the year constitutes a meritorious defense.”
Moreover, the parties had a previous agreement under which they were working, thereby causing the Father to assume the judgment would be consistent with it. “If the (trial) court’s assessment of the situation indicated that, as a matter of law, agreements between the parties was not a valid reason to default in dissolution, then we disagree. In this case, where the parties had voluntarily maintained a custody schedule and a child support schedule, where Father was not served with a different Parenting Plan that would have put him on notice that the parties did not have an agreement, where Mother knew that Father received his mail at a post office box and not the address where he was physically served, where the motion to set aside the default judgment was entered, and where the entered judgment differed significantly from the status quo, Father’s behavior in failing to file an answer was not intentionally or recklessly designed to impede the judicial process.
Courtesy of The Missouri Bar.