To a divorce lawyer, it is common to think that jointcustody is typically in the best interests of the child. But, sometimes a joint custody arrangement isnot in the best interest of the child. ...
To a divorce lawyer, it is common to think that jointcustody is typically in the best interests of the child. But, sometimes a joint custody arrangement isnot in the best interest of the child. Adivorce lawyer is generally aware that its decision will not be reversed unlessthe decision is manifestly erroneous or clearly wrong.
In one case from 2010, the Louisiana Court of Appeal for theThird Circuit reversed the trial courts award of joint custody. This case stands out even to a divorce lawyerbecause it was reversed based on the lower courts fact findings.
Before getting in to legalities, a divorce lawyer needs tofirst understand the facts. In thiscase, the child was born out of wedlock and the parents did not live together.The father was a successful businessman from Lafayette who owned a retailstore, a shopping center, an apartment complex, and rental properties fromwhich he derived income.
The child resided with the mother until after litigationcommenced. The mother took care of allthe childs needs. She received sporadicchild support from the father. He wouldonly visit the child on occasional evenings, at which time he simply watchedtelevision with the child. The motherwas a stay-at-home mother until 2004, at which time she enrolled herself inLSU-Eunice. The child began to attendday care two to three times a week, but the mother still retainedresponsibility for maintaining the childs well being.
When Hurricane Rita approached the area, the partiesseparately evacuated. However, thefather took the child and subsequently filed a paternity action and a petitionfor sole custody. It took three yearsfor the trial court to render a judgment in what started to be a simple custodycase. The trial court awarded jointcustody of the child.
The appellate court reviewed the entire record and found thetrial court committed manifest error. Itnoted that the father disregarded a protective order by hiring a privateinvestigator. Furthermore, the record contained a plethora of evidence whichsuggests that the father attempted to use influence in attaining his desiredresult. For example, he requested that aLouisiana State Senator intervene in pressuring a juvenile officer to file achild abuse charge even though the officer found no evidence of such.
The court noted that the record established that the childwas a happy and well-adjusted for the first four years of his life. However,the child became the fathers pawn and later his sought-after prize. Afterreviewing the evidence and considering the law, the appellate court ruled infavor of the mother granting her sole custody.
A divorce lawyer knows that no one is above the law. When a person or their divorce lawyer attemptsto use his resources to manipulate the judicial process, it undermines theintegrity and confidence of the proceedings. As such, a court will not toleratesuch actions. Nonetheless, a child bornout of wedlock can certainly be the subject of a child custody battle. Of course, the court will look to what is inthe best interest of the child when making a custody determination.
Theabove is purely informational. It is notlegal advice. Will Beaumont practiceslaw in New Orleans and provides information, such as the above, but this is notlegal advice.
Comments