My question involves a child custody case from the State of: ohio
I have been fighting grandparents visitation for over a year now & will continue as long as necessary. Wondering though if relocating to another state would be of any benefit?
Fighting Grandparents Visitation
Printable View
-
07-16-2013, 05:38 PM4momFighting Grandparents Visitation
-
07-16-2013, 05:47 PMMr. KnowitallRe: Fighting Grandparents Visitation
To the grandparents? Possibly.
-
07-16-2013, 06:05 PM4momRe: Fighting Grandparents Visitation
How about for the kids & I, could it prevent visitation?
-
07-16-2013, 07:34 PMAntigoneRe: Fighting Grandparents VisitationIf the action is already in motion, and the grandparent actually wins, this will be problematic for you and probably very expensive.Quote:
Quoting 4mom
-
07-16-2013, 07:36 PMaardvarcRe: Fighting Grandparents Visitation
If the grandparents prevail, it may very well put some or all of the COST of visitation on YOU. Simply relocating won't be grounds for the court determining if visitation will be granted or not. Either the court will find that they have standing and that visitation is in the best interest of the children, or it won't. Location of the children will only come into play when determining how any court ordered chunks of time get allocated (ie a few days a month if close, or weeks together over summer if you create great distance).
-
07-17-2013, 05:16 AMllworkingRe: Fighting Grandparents VisitationYes, moving to another state can be helpful in fighting a grandparent visitation suit...depending on the state you move to. Grandparent visitation cases are different than parent vs parent cases. The courts cannot stop you from moving in order to facilitate grandparent visitation nor can the courts take custody away from you for any reason due to a grandparent visitation case.Quote:
Quoting 4mom
It is also nearly impossible for a court to require a parent, in any third party case, to provide the cost of transportation to facilitate visitation. It is something that could easily be overturned on appeal. A court must violate a parent's constitutional rights in order to award visitation to a third party. State law allows for that to happen in limited circumstances, but many third party visitation cases are overturned on appeal since the USSC ruled on the matter in Troxel vs Granville, in June of 2000. Requiring a parent to also pay for the cost of such visitation, even if the cost increases due to a move, is not considered to be reasonable.
You have to be careful about the advice that you receive on internet message forums regarding third party cases. Many of the responders are so accustomed to the laws in parent vs parent cases, that they do not understand how vastly different the laws and case law is in parent vs third party cases. -
07-17-2013, 06:00 AMMr. KnowitallRe: Fighting Grandparents VisitationHowever the court does not lose jurisdiction over pending litigation and, even if the custody case between parents (something that may not be relevant here) were eventually transferred to another state, the issue of grandparent visitation is not covered by the UCCJEA. Ohio enforces grandparent visitation through contempt proceedings. Further, when an Ohio court finds that a party has willfully violated a custody order, including a grandparent visitation order, it is required to award court costs and reasonable attorney fees to the other party.Quote:
Quoting llworking
As a general rule, the third party is going to be ordered to pay transportation costs. I expect that one would be hard pressed to find an appellate case on the issue. But that doesn't answer the question of what might happen if the court finds that the parent's move is motivated primarily or exclusively by a desire to frustrate court-ordered access by a grandparent. If you have case law to back up the claim, "It is something that could easily be overturned on appeal" where a court had found that the purpose of the move-away was to frustrate its grandparent visitation order, please share it.Quote:
Quoting llworking
Third party visitation must be consistent with the parent's constitutional rights.Quote:
Quoting llworking
State laws do not trump the constitution.Quote:
Quoting llworking
Where are you getting that from? Or by "many" do you mean, "Some number, I'm not sure how many," in which case you could say that about any legal issue. States have significantly revised their grandparent visitation statutes such that it's much more difficult to obtain grandparent visitation in states that had more liberal policies prior to Troxel, but the dust settled. See, e.g., Harrold v. Collier, 107 Ohio St.3d 44, 836 N.E.2d 1165, 1172 (2005).Quote:
Quoting llworking
True. But it can also go the other way, and you might encounter a statement like "A court must violate a parent's constitutional rights in order to award visitation to a third party."Quote:
Quoting llworking
-
07-17-2013, 08:15 AMllworkingRe: Fighting Grandparents VisitationNot accurate. An originating state absolutely can lose jurisdiction over a gpv case. I have seen it happen dozens of times. Also, it is virtually impossible for a judge in an originating state to enforce sanctions against a parent in a gpv case. Their power ends at their state border. The third party would be required to ask the courts in the new state to domestic the orders and enforce them, and due to the fact that laws now vary dramatically from state to state on the issue, it becomes quite difficult to do so.Quote:
Quoting Mr. Knowitall
The great majority of parental moves in gpv cases are specifically to frustrate gpv. I have worked with literally thousands of parents fighting gpv cases and I don't know of a one of them who had a judge successfully order them to provide any of the transportation.Quote:
As a general rule, the third party is going to be ordered to pay transportation costs. I expect that one would be hard pressed to find an appellate case on the issue. But that doesn't answer the question of what might happen if the court finds that the parent's move is motivated primarily or exclusively by a desire to frustrate court-ordered access by a grandparent. If you have case law to back up the claim, "It is something that could easily be overturned on appeal" where a court had found that the purpose of the move-away was to frustrate its grandparent visitation order, please share it.
There is no way to make gpv constitutional. Hence Troxel.Quote:
Third party visitation must be consistent with the parent's constitutional rights.
State laws do not trump the constitution.
The only states that had ruled gpv unconstitutional either facially or "as applied" prior to Troxel were FL, TN, and WA (the state in question in Troxel). After Troxel nearly every state (with the exceptions of PA and NY) ruled their gpv statutes as unconstitutional on either an applied or facial basis. Off the top of my head MI had DeRose vs DeRose, IL had Lulay vs Lulay, NJ had Wilde vs Wilde. Pretty much all state legislatures have re-written the statutes to help make them conform with Troxel, but WA and TN are both examples of states where their courts keep striking down the rewritten laws.Quote:
Where are you getting that from? Or by "many" do you mean, "Some number, I'm not sure how many," in which case you could say that about any legal issue. States have significantly revised their grandparent visitation statutes such that it's much more difficult to obtain grandparent visitation in states that had more liberal policies prior to Troxel, but the dust settled. See, e.g., Harrold v. Collier, 107 Ohio St.3d 44, 836 N.E.2d 1165, 1172 (2005).
But my statement was 100% correct. The state overrides parent's constitutional rights in many ways. The state simply must find a compelling reason to do so. The difference between parent vs parent cases and parent vs third party cases is that in the former both parents have equal constitutional rights that must be protected, in the latter, the third party has none.Quote:
True. But it can also go the other way, and you might encounter a statement like "A court must violate a parent's constitutional rights in order to award visitation to a third party."
-
07-17-2013, 11:46 AM4momRe: Fighting Grandparents Visitation
Thank you all for your thoughts. A little more information: went through a dissolution & then less than a year after my ex husband was killed in an accident. Because of differing values, hostility towards me, interfering with the estate & many things my children brought to my attention, we stopped contact with the grandparents. Several months later I was served with gparents visitation papers. I'm just trying to explore all angles to protect my kids!
-
07-17-2013, 12:00 PMllworkingRe: Fighting Grandparents VisitationHow old are your children? How long has it been since they have seen the grandparents?Quote:
Quoting 4mom