Author: Patricia

Keith called his daughter earlier. He had to ask to speak to her 18 damn times! 18 TIMES!

J was on one, she accused me of influencing Keith’s decision of changing his mind about going to mediation. He just kept eating dinner, asking to speak to his daughter.

J tells him:

J- Better yet, let your wife interfere and make this decision and ruin it all for all of us!

K- you can take and say anything you want, I WANT TO TALK TO HER! (SD)

Just wild!

The ex filed her declaration on June 15th, 1998. Of course she wants more support. She also countered visitation with 4 weeks during the summer, alternating Easter vacation, each and every Fathers Day and alternating Christmas vacation. Keith requested SHE pay for all visitation transportation she she moved with out of state with out his ok or the authorization from the court. SHE’S requesting they “share equally in the cost of transportation.” She also lied in her declaration. My comments are in ( ).

BACKGROUND INFORMATION:

A final Judgment was entered on September 29, 1990. (Um, no it wasn’t. Check the records again.)

VISITATION:

Our final judgment was silent as to the issue of whether I could relocate with our two minor children. Therefore, I consulted with an E. C. attorney who suggested I provide Respondent with thirty days written notice. Accordingly, I followed this attorney’s advise and provided Respondent with thirty days written notice. I sent this notice to Respondent via certified Mail, return receipt requested. I am surprised that Respondent would raise this issue in his Declaration. It appears to me that if Respondent would have had a problem with me relocating he would have raised the issue earlier. It has been 5 years since I relocated. (He did raise the issue, in February 1993, when those court papers were drawn up in February. He didn’t sign them because he didn’t want the kids to leave. He also didn’t have time to consult an attorney because he was shown these papers the weekend of Feb 5th, 1993 and you left, according to a letter to his employer, on or Feb. 12th, 1993. That was the only “documentation” he ever received about your intent to move. He also brought it up again in the November 1995 declaration/letter to your attorney, and that was only 2 years after. You refused to discuss anything but an increase in support. Now in 1998, he brings it up again. That’s 3 times.)

Respondent states in his Declaration that I dictate which visitation Respondent should have. This is not true. (This is VERY true. Letters and phone calls prove that.)

At the beginning of the year, I suggest to Respondent certain dates and times for visitation. Respondent and I then negotiate until we mutually agree upon Respondents visitation schedule for the entire year. (HA! Um, NO, that’s not how that went, at all. YOU preferred visitation be scheduled and paid for upfront annually, and taken care of all at once, because you could afford to do it that way, but that’s not how it went. Visitation was discussed when it was up to you. Whenever Keith was ready to buy the tickets, you weren’t. It was ALWAYS a battle to get the visitation Keith wanted especially during the summer. It was bad enough he had to start sharing his time with your mom, but as far as summer went, what he requested and what he got were two different things. #FACTS.)

Respondent also states that I require him to pay for all costs of visitation. This is not true. Respondent and I have shared equally in the transportation costs for our children since February 1993. ( NOT True. 1993-February – saw kids for 4 days, before you left to Las Vegas to get married then move to WA state. Spring- DENIED- said you could not afford to send them and they were still getting used to the new area. Winter- DENIED. You kept the kids to spend time with your family in SD.

1994- Spring- You kept the kids, Summer- DENIED even though you were sent $400. Tickets were $198 per person. Winter- 4 days, Keith paid $248 for 4 days because you cancelled his two weeks with the kids and gave all but the 4 days to your mom.

1995- Spring-DENIED, Summer- only allowed 2 but took 3 weeks- you, your husband and his son dropped the kids off. On May 22nd, a letter from you was received saying not only that you “have the right to authorize visitation as I see fit…the divorce papers say that visitation is up to me, if you disagree let’s go back to court…” and that Keith would only get the kids from July 2nd- July 15th and that he had to pay full fare, one way for both kids to travel from LA to Sacramento so they can see your mom. When you called 7/1, you asked Keith why he was only keeping the kids until the 15th. You said you had sent another letter telling him if he was had vacation until the 23rd, and when he told you he never got that letter, you said, “Oh, too bad.” One was never sent and you knew that. You ALSO called the cops on Keith and told them he took the kids out of the County of SD and was holding them against their will. Since you had told Keith he could keep them until the 22nd, he kept the kids for a 3rd week, which you took issue with. You said your “contribution to airfare” was your fuel expense bringing the kids to him AFTER your vacation in SD, when it was convenient for you. Keith paid approx. $72.00 (x2) + $35 (UnAccom. Minor Fee)totaling approx $180.00. Winter- DENIED- according to your attorney, you were keeping the kids, you had taken two weeks off work, you were having out of town company coming in. Keith even offered to pay for transportation costs. You said NO)

1996- Got Kids for one week. Keith paid $161. Not sure what you paid though Maybe less, if mileage benefit was applied.. Summer- DENIED. You had already said Keith can have the kids from 8/11 – 8/30. We had to move by 8/12. Keith told you this, and he Keith requested the kids for a week from 8/24- 8/31, still within the time frame you said. You called Keith on 8/20 telling he can’t see the kids, “but there’s always Christmas.” Keith said, “whatever you say, I’ll talk to you later” and hung up. Winter- DENIED- 10/29 you called and asked Keith about splitting airfare 3 ways and splitting his vacation time with the kids, with your mom. He asked if you can buy the tickets and he would reimburse you. You said you had to think about it. He called you on 11/19, you hadn’t decided. 11/24- you said NO.

1997-Spring- got kids for the week. We paid $169 + $10 wire fee to wire you the money. She paid, $169. Summer- got kids 4 weeks. We paid $203 + $10 wire fee to wire you the money. You paid $203. Christmas- Got kids- paid $268+ $10 towards your fuel expense + $10 UAM fee to you. You paid $268. Keith also gave up 3 days of his time with the kids so they can spend time with your family, and quite possibly you too. Fair? Equal? Hardly.

1998- Spring- got kids 1 week- paid $204 +$20 towards her fuel expense to drive from SD to LA. Fair? Equal? Hardly, but again, if he didn’t contribute to your fuel expense, you would not have let him see the kids.)

With respect to Respondent’s requested visitation, I would agree to the following: a) Four (4) weeks during summer vacation; b) Alternating Easter vacation; c) Each and every Father’s Day Weekend; d) Alternating Christmas vacation. I will agree to the above-mentioned visitation schedule and to share equally in the cost of transportation. (each and every Father’s Day Weekend? Really? WHY hasn’t he had the kids Father’s Day ANY year? He IS their Father. OH WAIT, because EVERY year, the 3rd Sunday of June is ALWAYS so Close to your daughter’s birthday, and can’t have Keith celebrating EITHER with his kids, right? Hasn’t happened so far….)

Respondent has additionally requested unobstructed telephone contact with our two children. I have never interfered with any telephone contact nor do I plan to in the future. (CRAZY how your Response Declaration was filed today, 6/15/98. Really? Then WHY did Keith have to ask to speak to his daughter 15- 18 times when he called this evening? Because YOU weren’t obstructing telephone contact huh? I call BS.

CHILD SUPPORT: It is respectfully requested that this court order Guideline child support in the amount of $1,046.00. (based on income, Time share of 10% and Mandatory deductions of Respondents.) (ALL based on incorrect income, according to check stubs. Anything over and above his guaranteed pay is OT which is not readily available.)

Respondent’s Request for Hardship Deduction: It is respectfully requested that Respondent’s request for a hardship be denied. It is not fair to my children that Respondent has recently had a new baby with his current wife, or my responsibility to support his step-daughter. Respondent’s wife’s child and Respondent’s new baby should be supported by Respondent and his new wife. (I do believe he got this hardship)

Tax Filing: (She got it, Keith never mentioned it.)

Spousal Support: I agree that the SD Superior Court should terminate jurisdiction over the issue of spousal support because of my remarriage. (good)

Attorney’s Fees and Court Costs: Due to the substantial disparity between my income and Respondents income, it will be necessary for Respondent to make a reasonable contribution to my attorney’s fees and court costs. A substantial contribution is necessary so that I can properly present my case. Based upon the foregoing, it is respectfully submitted that Respondent make a reasonable contribution toward my attorneys fees and court costs. (Um, you’ve perjured yourself….and it can be proven)

CONCERNING RESPONDENTS REQUEST FOR PERSONAL CONDUCT RESTRAINING ORDER: I have no reason to contact Respondent other than issues dealing with our minor children. In fact, Respondent and I have not communicated verbally in the last three years on any issue, other than the children. On the other hand, it is Respondents new Wife that consistently calls my home, to harass me. (Well, isn’t THAT a bold face lie. THAT can be proven as perjury as well. You have called Keith and berated him because it was MY writing on a box, or because I sent the kids a letter, which you returned, and these incidences happened within the last 3 years. Let’s not get started on your phone calls to ME, personally that are severely harassing.)

Transportation Costs: It is respectfully requested that Respondent and I share equally in all costs of transportation for the purpose of visitation. (you mean, airfare, airport to airport.)

Insurance for the Minor Children: Respondent maintains the primary insurance through his employment and my current husband maintains secondary insurance for our children through his employment. Our prior court order, filed December 21, 1995, requires Respondent and I to share equally in all uncovered medical, dental, orthodontia, vision or psychological costs incurred for the benefit of our minor children. However, Respondent failed and refused to reimburse me any uncovered costs. Therefore, Respondent and I agreed that I would continue to receive the day care in the amount of $100. 00 per month as and for reimbursement toward the uncovered medical costs. Specifically, the cost of our son’s braces was $3,200.00. Respondent has reimbursed me via the day care payment. The day care stopped being incurred in June 1996. (so you got Child Care for 6 months, then continued to keep the $100 for it to go towards your son’s braces. If I’m not mistaken, the $3200 is TOTAL, not after insurance, payments, and discounts, etc. Will have to look more into this. What I DO know, is that you had a hard time sending and at times refused to send copies of the EOB’s from your insurance. You’ve been under the impression that Keith pays what YOU say. That’s not how this works.)

RESTRAINING ORDERS: Respondent has requested that I be restrained with any of his mailings to our children. I have never interfered with any letters, cards, or gifts that Respondent has sent. Respondent also requests that I be restrained from making any disparaging comments about Respondent or his wife. I would never speak negatively about Respondent or his wife in the presence of our children. This would not be in the best interest of our two minor children. Respondent knows that our children come first and I would never do anything to interfere with Respondent’s relationship with our children. (MOST DEFINITELY DEBATABLE. There is proof to the contrary.)

AIRLINE TRANSPORTATION: It is respectfully requested that our children fly out of S for their visitation with Respondent. The reason I am requesting that they fly out of S is because of the substantial decrease in the cost of the airline ticket from S. I do not mind driving the additional four hours in an effort to reduce the cost of transportation. In the event of bad winter, it is impossible for me to drive from (her town) to S because of the road closings. Therefore, in the event the weather does not permit me to drive to S, it is respectfully requested that the children fly out of (her town) or Sp airport. (it seems that more often than not, there would be a long layover or change of planes in S if the kids flew from one of the other more local airports, and that’s what you didn’t want and Keith didn’t feel safe about that either. )

If I were called as a witness in this proceeding, I could and would competently testify to the facts stated herein. I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of CA that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed this 6th day of June, 1998, at SD, CA.

Her attorney signed the verification form regarding her Declaration, on June 12th, and it was filed on June 15th.

Anthony sent me Sarah’s insurance card. I received it today.

Received another payment from Anthony. It was for $25 this time.

After receiving the Health Plan information from Anthony, I wrote him a letter.

I explained that in order to get the maximum benefits from his insurance and in order to keep the out of pocket expenses down, I will need a copy of the Preferred Provider directory and an Explanation of Benefits booklet.

I told him that if there is an out of pocket expense, he can pay me, or he can send payment directly to the provider we use, that it was his choice.

I went on to say that although it isn’t ideal, it is understood that the least amount he has to deal with me, the easier and better it is for him and that is fine, I have no problem with it.

I told him it’s hard enough for kids to grow up these days dealing with peer pressure, drug abuse, violence, etc. and compounding this with parents who can’t get along, can be nothing but detrimental. I went on to say that I am sure that although he has no desire to meet our daughter, he doesn’t want her hurt or for anything bad to happen to her.

I thanked him again and asked him to please look into getting the information to me that I requested. I told him to take care of himself and God bless him and his family.

By this time, he hasn’t seen our daughter, or made any effort to, since she was 10 months old. Prior to THAT, it was when he was almost 7 months old, and she will be 4 this year.

I give credit where and when credit is due. I received a packet today from Anthony regarding his health plan. YEAH, FINALLY!

Court papers were filed today, May 1, 1998 and Keith and the ex will be going to court June 19, 1998.

This time Keith has an attorney.

“Regarding Child visitation: checked OTHER: Specific (see Declaration), modify existing order filed on 11/29/90. Ordering: A. Mutually agreed upon B. Not to remove the minor children from the State of CA. (See declaration)

Regarding Child Support: Checked Modify existing order: date filed 12/21/95. Ordering: $350 per month per child.

Regarding Spousal Support: Terminate existing order. Modify existing order filed on 11/29/30 ordering: reserve jurisdiction.

Attorney FEES and COSTS: $2000.

RESTRAINT ON PERSONAL CONDUCT: PETITIONER (EX)

a. shall not molest, strike, threaten, sexually or otherwise assault, or otherwise disturb the peace of the other party

b. shall not contact or telephone the other party

c. except that peaceful contacts relating to minor children of the parties shall be permitted.

OTHER RELIEF: See Declaration

FACTS IN SUPPORT of relief requested and change of circumstances for any modification are: contained in the attached declaration.

RE: VISITATION: That notwithstanding the terms and conditions of the Judgment of Dissolution filed with this Court on November 29, 1990, Petitioner, without m y verbal or written consent, in or about February of 1993, moved to the State of WA with our minor children. Because I was without funds at the time, nor was I represented by counsel, I was without the necessary funds to do anything about Petitioner’s unlawful move.

That, the Judgment of Dissolution states in substance with regard to this issue that your Declarant’s visitation with the children would be consistent with mutual agreement. The unfortunate fact of the matter is, visitation is in accordance with Petitioner’s dictates. I am allowed visitation only when Petitioner says so, for so long as Petitioner says and only if your Declarant pays for all costs of visitation.

That, your Declarant requests the following visitation with our minor children:

a. one half of the summer vacation;

b. Every Spring (Easter) vacation;

c. Every Father’s Day weekend;

d. The children’s birthday weekends in ever even numbered year (that is, the first weekend after the children’s birthday from the applicable Friday to the following Sunday);

e. Christmas vacation (of approximately two weeks in every odd numbered year, and,

f. Alternating major holiday weekends.

Additionally, I am requesting that I have daily unobstructed telephone contact with our minor children.

That, regarding the costs of transporting the children, I am requesting this Court make the orders discussed below.

REGARDING CHILD SUPPORT: That, I request this Court order guideline in accordance with my actual income (including the FAMILY CODE hardship deductions to which I am entitled) and Petitioner’s actual income or imputed income. Additionally, I request that this court terminate the wage assignment deduction for child care, as our children have not had child care for some years.

REGARDING SPOUSAL SUPPORT: that, as Petitioner has remarried, I request that this Court terminate the Court’s jurisdiction over the issue of Spousal Support.

REGARDING ATTORNEY FEES/COSTS: That, this OSC only becomes necessary as a direct result of Petitioner’s unlawful move, her lack of dealing with your Declarant in good faith as it relates to visitation, telephone contact with our minor children, child care costs, child support, or the requested restraining orders as set forth below. Accordingly, it is requested that this Court order Petitioner to contribute to my attorney’s fees of two thousand dollars and my actual costs.

REGARDING RESTRAINT ON PERSONAL CONDUCT: That, it is requested that this Court enjoin and restrain Petitioner from contacting your Declarant for any reason other than regarding necessary contacts regarding our minor children (i.e.: emergencies, visitation, travel plans regarding our minor children, etc.) Unfortunately, Petitioner calls your Declarant and upsets my entire household with her mean comments;

REGARDING OTHER RELIEF: That, because of Petitioner’s unlawful move out of state, it is requested that this court order Petitioner to incur the costs of all transportation;

That, this Court order your Declarant and Petitioner to each maintain our minor children on policies of medical/dental insurance, and to each pay an equal share of any uncovered medical/dental costs regarding care and treatment to our minor children. Additionally, it is requested that this Court order each party to contact the other regarding any non-emergency medical care and treatment prior to any such treatment (other than normal check ups and treatment for common medical conditions) if contribution from the other is contemplated. Petitioner will typically incur certain costs without the courtesy of an explanation or a copy of the billing or proof of payment;

That, this Court enjoin and restrain Petitioner from interfering with my mailings to our children. Unfortunately, Petitioner will intercept letters, cards and gifts that I have mailed to our children and return same or discard same. It is important for our minor children and certainly in their best interest to know that their father is thinking of them, and it is cruel for Petitioner to interfere with that aspect of my relationship with our children;

That, it is requested that this Court enjoin and restrain Petitioner from making any disparaging comments about your Declarant (or my wife) in the presence of our minor children. Unfortunately, Petitioner speaks very badly about your Declarant in the presence of our children and I am requesting that this Court put a stop to that conduct; and,

That, it is requested that this Court order Petitioner to transport the minor children to the applicable airport (or other location of commercial transportation) as such time(s) as it becomes necessary regarding your Declarants visitation rights. Petitioner has threatened in the past not to take the children to the nearest airport unless I pay for her gasoline (this demand coming from the very person who violated the Judgment of Dissolution by moving out of state- a move which has substantially interfered with my relationship with the minor children.

I have read this Declaration and affirm to the truth and accuracy of the content. My signature under penalty of perjury appears on the Application For Order and Supporting Declaration filed with this declaration.

Anthony sent another payment towards uncovered medical expenses. I received it today.

Anthony called me earlier today. He told me of his intent to add our daughter to his Health Plan. He also told me he would send me her medical card and any and all necessary information regarding her coverage, when he receives it. He said he was “trying” to abide by court orders.

I did feel badly when he said he had had a boating accident and that I had hoped his leg was healing well and he was feeling better every day.

It was a good convo.

Anthony called earlier today and said he is adding our daughter to his health benefits plan. I thanked him and told him to let me know when he wants to see Sarah.

I told him that even though the orders say no rights of visitation, we can work around it, just let me know.