Dali’s most famous painting was called the “persistance of clocks.”
Often during the litigation of the a highly contested child custody case the judicial officer has to make very quick and emotionally charged orders in order to effectuate custody results that are correct and effective to all parties involved. The main objective for the judge is to achieve the best interest of the child standard. To achieve this result the judge often hears arguments and evidence from both parents including experts who determine the best interest of the child. When the Judge gets his order of change of custody wrong there is a remedy. The remedy is called a peremptory writ which can be sought by either parent contesting the Judges descision. A party can use a writ if they feel that the Judge based his legal analysis on faulty law.
A recent case in Georgia labeled Dass v Markle illustrated the usage of the peremptory writ in a child custody family law case. The dispute between the parties Donald Markle and Katrina Dass arose out of the dispute about where the home state of the minor child was established. When there is an interstate child custody dispute and or a move away dispute that arises in the Family Law Courts an error of law is often likely to occur. In the the case of Das v Markle the father left Georgia for New Mexico leaving behind Dasd, the mother the with the child in Georgia. The mother lived in Georgia for another year until 2011 and then Headed to New Mexico and lived their with the father for another year before returning home to Georgia until 2015. From 2012 to 2015 the child visited with Markle, the father, in New Mexico during the summers. After 2015 to 2016 the child went back to New Mexico and lived with father. The father then filed a Paternity action in New Mexico to establish who the father and the mother were legally of the child. In addtion, the New Mexico Court ordered that in order to move the child from New Mexico both parents needed to consent to the move.
The mother, Dass therein filed the writ of habeous Corpus and an emergency custody motion in Georgia Superior Court asking for immediate removal of the child from New Mexico and declaring that Georgia was the home state. The mother needed to show under the peremtory writ law that the Judges in New Mexico did not use “best Interest” standard but used “changed circumstances” standard to determine the custody order. The Georgia Superior Court granted her writ of habeus corpus. The father however, filed an appeal in Georgia appealing the granting of the Writ. The Georgia appeals Court overturned the Superior Court ruling of the return of the child to Georgia.
Often parties find themselves involved in a long term relationships and acquire a lot of real and personal property together. They cannot file divorce petition with the court and go to Family Court however, they may seek an alternative approach and head to Civil Court to resolve all there property issues. If the parties head to Civil Court the law that would apply is that of Contracts. There can be several different methods to prove a case under Marvin v Marvin case law. There are express contracts and there are implied contracts.
The Family Law Code does not apply therefore the parties must head to court and find other means to go to Court and resolve all property disputes. One such way is through a legal term call “quantum meruit.” This can be considered an implied contract. To prove that quantum meruit exists the parties must prove that Action there were reasonable services rendered during the relationship. Often it is argued there must be sexual relationship involved to recover under quantum meruit but the Courts have stated that it is not necessary as long as the person gave certain services to the other party during the relationship. Once it is proven that the party gave services to the other party the Court must then look at what services and support the other party returned in favor such as the reasonable value of support received. Courts have gone further to explain that the parties need not have lived together however, in order to prove a case in Court based on a Implied or Express contract there would be no consideration found if the parties did not live together.
The act of Consideration is the key element to proving a Marvin case in the state of California. Because often there is no consideration and the party seeking monetary compensation for living with the other party will fail in court. A big hang up the party will find in Court is that just because they had meretricious relationship it does not mean that they can get compensation for that alone. That means that sexual relationships alone cannot be the single factor for going to Court to get a financial reward in a Marvin case. There has to be some sort of services rendered in the relationship to warrant a financial payment as a result.
What is meant by filing a paternity lawsuit in Orange County or Los Angeles County? Well, you will need to file a paternity action if you have child with another person and are not legally married in California.
If you and your boyfriend/girlfriend have a child out of wedlock and you suddenly break off the relationship, you will need to file a Petition to Establish Parental Relationship. You will likely request child custody, child visitation and child support orders. Some parents request that the costs of the pregnancy be paid as well.
If you believe that you are not the child’s father, you will need to request a DNA test to determine the biological father. If you have been determined to not be the father (after undergoing DNA testing) and the mother has already filed a Department of Child Support Services claim, you will be absolved of all child support due and owing. If you are found to be the father, you will owe that child support.
After a 14 year relationship, Johnny Depp and Vanessa Paradis have decided to split.
Depp, 49, and Paradis, 39, first started their relationship in 1998. Their romance began in June of 1998. The couple have two minor children together.
From an Orange County child custody lawyer’s perspective, although the parties were never married, the couple will still have to work out a reasonable parenting plan for their kids. The kids were raised in the South of France but reports state that they have moved to Los Angeles.
Rapper, DMX, will be going to court with a woman who claims he fathered a child with her 10 years ago.
DMX has been sued by Patricia Trejo over allegations that he failed to pay his child support payments to her for his alleged daughter. It should also be noted that DMX also has ten (10!) other children with several different women. Yikes! This father has a lot of child support to cough up.
She appeared at Los Angeles Superior Court on Thursday as part of the ongoing case, according to TMZ.com, claiming she is owed more than $1 million in back payments.
Well this comes as no surprise. We all knew this woman was looking to extort Justin Bieber and gain publicity. Reports have now surfaced that Mariah Yeater dismissed her paternity lawsuit last week. Yeater’s lawyers apparently dropped the case after receiving a call from Bieber’s lawyer threatening to sue.
Additionally, Bieber was prepared to take a DNA test to disprove Yeater’s claims.
What is also interesting to note is that Yeater may have also faced statutory rape charges. In the State of California, the age of consent is 18, and Bieber would have been 16 at that time of the alleged sexual encounter, according to Yeater’s accusation.
Last week I blogged about a potential paternity lawsuit involving pop star Justin Bieber. Now, sources close to the star claim that he will submit to a DNA test to determine whether he is the father of Mariah Yeater’s child. Bieber plans to take the test when he returns to the United States from Europe next week.
Additionally, according to the source, Bieber & Co. intend to not only take legal action against his 20-year-old accuser but also hold her lawyers accountable for what the singer’s reps have previously described as “malicious, defamatory and demonstrably false claims.”
“We will vigorously pursue all available legal remedies to defend and protect Justin against these allegations,” the Bieber camp said in a statement last Tuesday.
The internet and media was a buzz last week about a claiming that the father of her newborn baby girl is pop star, Justin Bieber. Maria Yeater, age 20, gave birth to a baby and claims that they had a quick sexual encounter after a concert, resulting in Bieber being the father of her child. However, Bieber quickly denied said claim, claiming that he has never met the young girl.
Reports are surfacing as to whether Bieber will be forced to submit to a DNA test to prove or disprove whether or not he is the father of the child.
From an Orange County divorce lawyer’s perspective, it is possible that the court could order Bieber to submit to a DNA test to get the issue out of the way. Indeed, if Bieber indeed never met Yeater, a DNA test may be the only way to clear his name.
The Los Angeles County child custody and child support battle between Mel Gibson and his ex-girlfriend, Oksana Grigorieva has been resolved (at last!). According to reports, Mel will pay Oksana the sum of $750,000 over the next five years. Further, Oksana will continue to live in the house owned by Mel until the minor child turns the age of 18. Thereafter, the house will be sold and the proceeds placed in a trust for the child. Additional provisions of the order preclude the parties from publicly discussing each other or their relationship. The Judge also specifically stated that they also cannot write books about each other.
With respect to the Los Angeles child custody issues, the parties will share joint legal and joint physical custody of the child. As part of the parties’ duties in sharing joint legal custody, for example purposes only, they must jointly make decisions regarding the following:
1. Enrollment or termination in a particular private or public school;