Except she hasn't made other plans, nor would the argument, "He didn't identify a week, so I immediately made plans for the entire month that cannot be changed," be credible.
Printable View
Except she hasn't made other plans, nor would the argument, "He didn't identify a week, so I immediately made plans for the entire month that cannot be changed," be credible.
Dad didn't get his time in by May 1st, but I don't believe that mom can just outright now deny him any time. Normally with orders like this, if the time is not in by the deadline then the CP can just pick the time the NCP gets. But the NCP still gets that time.
If I was dad I would file on this, still lots of time to possibly get that 1 week sometime this summer. But since he failed to get his time in, and this has now caused a problem, I would bet the court will now add further to this in the order.
Something along the line of having it in by May 1st, if not it goes to default of certain week in July or that CP then gets to just pick his week. That is pretty standard for a situation like this.
Both are at fault here, him for not getting the time in and her for just deciding since he didn't that she can now deny his time. Nowhere did he say it says that in the order. He has little summer time as it is in that order, and I don't think a courts intention of that order was so mom could deny him time with the child. The intention of the order was to allow dad(NCP)the first shot at picking his week of time.