First and foremost, here is a present from LJ to free LJ users.
Secondly, I received the botched and deranged Final Order [finally after 4 weeks of nonsensical waiting] from Tara’s attorney [don't you like how the judge had her attorney draw up the Final Order?], which omitted tons of stuff, but added a few derogatory items…..as a Xmas present I’m guessing.
This is my response, which actually should have been 20x more harsh………but when I appeal I will have to deal with many of the absurd and outrageous legal issues as it is…….
—————————————————————————-
December 15, 2005
Gary M Wood
819-A John B White Sr. Blvd.
Spartanburg SC 29306
Dear Mr. Wood:
This letter to advise you of the matter involving Case# 2004-DR-42-2128 and the proposed Final Order, which was finally received on 12-14-05 at 3:00PM . Judge Eugene A Morehead, III, presided over this custody case in the Spartanburg County Family Court located at 180 Magnolia St. Spartanburg SC 28304.
This letter is in response to your letter dated 12-12-05 and serves as a petition to appropriately modify the Final Order, which was drawn up by you, but did not include all the required matters that were brought before and ordered by the court.
Therefore, below I offer a more balanced examination of the Final Order, according to Judge Eugene A Morehead’s declarations:
1) You did not state in the opening paragraph my claims for joint custody [not action] and fees relating to the case, though you did happen to mention Tara Triplett’s? Nor did you state the fact that Tara Triplett and you initially asked for the case to be dismissed, which is what I initially did.
2) All references to visitation should correctly say, ‘Parenting Time’.
3) In Paragraph 3 of your supposed “Statements of Fact” you incorrectly claim that in the custody order [that was consequently never enforced], which was drawn up in Tennessee, only ‘allowed’ for alternating weekends of parenting time, which is not true. The original custody order correctly stated that Tara would maintain Primary PHYSICAL custody, with both of us enjoying joint legal custody. Furthermore, the Tennessee order stated that parenting time would include one week, PLUS two alternating weekends out of each month. To this day this same custody order from Tennessee, which has been registered in Spartanburg County SC since March 2004, has never been adhered to by Tara Triplett or enforced by South Carolina.
4) Paragraph 5 is utterly venomous and should not be entered into the ‘Statements of Fact’, for it was never agreed to nor proven as fact within the courtroom, nor anywhere else. Judge Morehead never dictated that such falsehoods be placed in the order, though I do not deny the obvious fact that I have not seen or heard from our son in over a year, for no justifiable cause or reason.
5) In the ‘Conclusions of Law’, paragraph 2, it is claimed that there exist a ‘substantial change of circumstances’, which is the supposed reason Tara was unjustly awarded sole custody. Neither in court, nor anywhere else for that matter, was it ever established that there existed a substantial change of circumstance, aside from the fact that Tara has attempted to destroy my reputation and the bond between Fabien and his father. If we were to truly follow South Carolina Law, as it should have been, this is what the Final Order would command, more or less:
SECTION 20-7-100. Rights and duties of parents in regard to their minor children.
The mother and father are the joint natural guardians of their minor children and are equally charged with the welfare and education of their minor children and the care and management of the estates of their minor children; and the mother and father have equal power, rights, and duties, and neither parent has any right paramount to the right of the other concerning the custody of the minor or the control of the services or the earnings of the minor or any other matter affecting the minor. Each parent, whether the custodial or non-custodial parent of the child, has equal access and the same right to obtain all educational records and medical records of their minor children and the right to participate in their children’s school activities unless prohibited by order of the court. Neither parent shall forcibly take a child from the guardianship of the parent legally entitled to custody of the child.
6) However, there has been a substantial change of circumstances since the November 2005 court date, on my part, so I will soon have to deal with that accordingly.
7) In the Ordered/Judgment Section of the document, paragraph 2, you state that I am to be ‘allowed’ only 2 alternating weekends a month, which was not Judge Morehead’s decree in the courtroom. While I will agree that at this point, weekends may perhaps be the best time to have parenting time with Fabien, starting 6pm on Friday and ending around 6pm on Sunday, I do not recall the judge ordering that I would only be ‘allowed’ 2 weekends a month. If I recall correctly it was ordered that I could in fact have parenting time with Fabien, after February 2006, every weekend, if I so desired it.
In paragraph 5 of the same section, how is it that you claim that I was so ordered to pay YOU $1,700.00, when it was so ordered in court that I pay Tara the attorney fees she had already relinquished to you.
9) You completely left out parenting time in regards to nationally recognized holidays, including Fabien’s birthday, Father’s day, etc?
10) 10) Shouldn’t there exist a ‘move-away’ clause in the Final Order? Any more moves out-of-state [or further away] by Tara [other than the 3 already] would not be in Fabien’s best interest.
Moreover, there are several other items that should have been entered into this order, which were not, so I have included them below:
1) Alcohol will be limited to legal driving limits while the child is in that parents care. That is to say that the attending parent will at all times stay within the limits of that states driving allowance regulations.
2) Except for those drugs available over the counter or those prescribed by a doctor for an immediately identifiable illness, within the dates of prescription as listed on the container, neither parent shall at any point have any drugs or knowledge of such drugs while the child is the responsibility of that parent whether in their presence or not.
3) The child shall be allowed to participate in any school based activity that does not conflict with a formerly agreed upon activity or appointment (which does not allow for such participation) and the cost shall be split equally by both parents.
4) Both parents shall be allowed to attend any school related function attended by the child and shall be notified within 48 hours of any such event.
5) Any disagreements between parents will be discussed in the absence of the child.
6) The parties have the right to be free from unwarranted derogatory remarks, prolonged aggravation, offensive insinuations and fabrications made about such parent or such parent’s family by the other parent to or in the presence of Fabien. Furthermore, no disparaging comments about the other parent or their choices shall be made to or in the presence of the child by their associates.
7) The child and parents alike have the right at all times to contact the other so long as it does not cause any inconvenience or disruption, which includes at least the right to unimpeded telephone conversations with Fabien at least three times a week for a reasonable amount of duration.
The parties have the right to send and receive mail from/to Fabien that the other parent shall not open or censor.
9) The parties have the right to receive notice and relevant information as soon as practicably (within 24 hours) possible of any hospitalization, major illness or death of Fabien.
10) The parties have the right to receive directly from Fabien’s school/daycare, upon request (and payment of reasonable costs of duplication, etc), copies of his report cards, attendance records, names of classes and teachers, test scores and any other records customarily made available to parents. Both parents should be directly involved in the selection of courses made available to Fabien during the whole course of his elementary and secondary schooling.
11) The parties have the right to receive directly from Fabien’s doctors/physicians, upon request (and payment of reasonable costs of duplication, etc), names/addresses/phone numbers of such medical professionals, copies of medical records, medical prescriptions and/or any decisions/diagnosis administered by a licensed physician including any other such records customarily made available to parents. Both parents should be directly involved in any decision that involves the prolonged use of medication and/or extended outpatient advice/counseling/treatment managed by a licensed pediatrician, mental health professional, physician and/or doctor.
12) Each parent shall be kept informed of all school related and extracurricular activities, as well as grades, to include conferences, which either or both may attend.
13) That this co-parenting agreement shall be enforceable and punishable upon the finding of non-compliance, according to state law.
14) A move-away clause stating that, “”The custodial parent will not remove the domicile of the minor children from the state of South Carolina without the written permission of the judge in this case.”
http://www.deltabravo.net/custody/moveaway.php
As you have clearly witnessed here I am recommending quite an appropriately fair and balanced interpretation of Judge Eugene A Morehead’s Final Order. Until these issues are addressed I cannot sign the Final Order.
Sincerely,
ME
