If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
denying visits
Where the custodial parent seeks to restrict visitation rights, he or she
bears the burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence that the existing visitation seriously endangers the child. (Griffiths v. Griffiths (1984), 127 Ill. App. 3d 126, 129; In re Marriage of Neat (1981), 101 Ill. App. 3d 1046, 1048.) In re Marriage of Anderson, 474 N.E.2d 911, 130 Ill. App. 3d 684 (1985). A restriction on visitation is action which limits, restrains, or confines visitation within bounds. (In Re Marriage of Tisckos/ Stewart (1987), 161 Ill. App. 3d 302, 310,514 N.E.2d 523, 528.) A termination of visitation is a restriction (In re Marriage of Dunn (1987), 155 Ill. App. 3d 247, 254, 508 N.E.2d 250, 255), as is a prohibition on overnight visitation. Likewise, a requirement that visitation be supervised, occur in the home of the custodial parent, or outside the home of the noncustodial parent is a restriction. (Tisckos/Stewart, 161 Ill. App. 3d at 310, 514 N.E.2d at 528.) In re the Marriage LaTour, 608 N.E.2d 1339, 241 Ill. App. 3d 500, (1993) more case law on http://www.fathers-rights.com |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
denying visits
"fathersrights" wrote in message news Where the custodial parent seeks to restrict visitation rights, he or she bears the burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence that the existing visitation seriously endangers the child. NOT when the custodial parent is the mother. (Griffiths v. Griffiths (1984), 127 Ill. App. 3d 126, 129; In re Marriage of Neat (1981), 101 Ill. App. 3d 1046, 1048.) In re Marriage of Anderson, 474 N.E.2d 911, 130 Ill. App. 3d 684 (1985). A restriction on visitation is action which limits, restrains, or confines visitation within bounds. (In Re Marriage of Tisckos/ Stewart (1987), 161 Ill. App. 3d 302, 310,514 N.E.2d 523, 528.) A termination of visitation is a restriction (In re Marriage of Dunn (1987), 155 Ill. App. 3d 247, 254, 508 N.E.2d 250, 255), as is a prohibition on overnight visitation. Likewise, a requirement that visitation be supervised, occur in the home of the custodial parent, or outside the home of the noncustodial parent is a restriction. (Tisckos/Stewart, 161 Ill. App. 3d at 310, 514 N.E.2d at 528.) In re the Marriage LaTour, 608 N.E.2d 1339, 241 Ill. App. 3d 500, (1993) more case law on http://www.fathers-rights.com |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
denying visits
On Apr 2, 10:55?pm, "Chris" wrote:
"fathersrights" wrote in message news Where the custodial parent seeks to restrict visitation rights, he or she bears the burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence that the existing visitation seriously endangers the child. NOT when the custodial parent is the mother. (Griffiths v. Griffiths (1984), 127 Ill. App. 3d 126, 129; In re Marriage of Neat (1981), 101 Ill. App. 3d 1046, 1048.) In re Marriage of Anderson, 474 N.E.2d 911, 130 Ill. App. 3d 684 (1985). A restriction on visitation is action which limits, restrains, or confines visitation within bounds. (In Re Marriage of Tisckos/ Stewart (1987), 161 Ill. App. 3d 302, 310,514 N.E.2d 523, 528.) A termination of visitation is a restriction (In re Marriage of Dunn (1987), 155 Ill. App. 3d 247, 254, 508 N.E.2d 250, 255), as is a prohibition on overnight visitation. Likewise, a requirement that visitation be supervised, occur in the home of the custodial parent, or outside the home of the noncustodial parent is a restriction. (Tisckos/Stewart, 161 Ill. App. 3d at 310, 514 N.E.2d at 528.) In re the Marriage LaTour, 608 N.E.2d 1339, 241 Ill. App. 3d 500, (1993) more case law onhttp://www.fathers-rights.com- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Technically yes it should apply is the custodial is the mother. However, we know how that goes. Custody laws mean squat. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
denying visits
"Chris" wrote "fathersrights" wrote ................. NOT when the custodial parent is the mother. == Chris, fathersrights is a long time scammer/spammer who is a for-profit peddler of worthless crap to NCPs. If you feel compelled to engage him, please at least trim his posts to as not to perpetuate his BS. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
denying visits
Me thinks you protest too much. If the materials weren't effective you
feminists wouldnt hate them so much. You totally neglect all the FREE help for fathers available at http://www.fathersrights.org; And fathers,if you think custody law doesn"t control in custody cases, no wonder you lost your case. "Gini" wrote in message news:QBrQh.2833$gb6.2603@trndny07... "Chris" wrote "fathersrights" wrote ................ NOT when the custodial parent is the mother. == Chris, fathersrights is a long time scammer/spammer who is a for-profit peddler of worthless crap to NCPs. If you feel compelled to engage him, please at least trim his posts to as not to perpetuate his BS. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
denying visits
"fathersrights" wrote in message ... Me thinks you protest too much. If the materials weren't effective you feminists wouldnt hate them so much. You totally neglect all the FREE help for fathers available at http://www.fathersrights.org; And fathers,if you think custody law doesn"t control in custody cases, no wonder you lost your case. Free help that offers false hope is worthless. You have never been able to back up your claims when challenged by posters here who know better than to accept your statements at face value. Until you can back up your theories with facts and cites there is no way to consider your materials as being "effective". |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
denying visits
On Apr 6, 8:44�pm, "fathersrights" wrote:
Me thinks you protest too much. If the materials weren't effective you feminists wouldnt hate them so much. You totally neglect all the FREE help for fathers available at *http://www.fathersrights.org;*And fathers,if you think custody law doesn"t control in custody cases, no wonder you lost your case."Gini" wrote in message news:QBrQh.2833$gb6.2603@trndny07... "Chris" *wrote "fathersrights" *wrote ................ NOT when the custodial parent is the mother. == Chris, fathersrights is a long time scammer/spammer who is a for-profit peddler of worthless crap to NCPs. *If you feel compelled to engage him, please at least trim his posts to as not to perpetuate his BS.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - 999/1000 times custody is decided by case law, not state statute. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
denying visits
TACTIC 1
Pleadings requesting only limited visitation are the best evidence of an unwillingness to facilitate! Use those pleadings as an example in your closing argument. Argue: "My client seeks equal time for the parents. Mrs. X seeks to limit the father's time to every other weekend. Mrs. X's pleadings .... (lift up her pleadings).. and arguments before this court ... are the best evidence of her unwillingness to further a close and continuing relationship between the child and the father!" (A major AND CASE WINNING element in best interests statutes) see more FREE case winning tactics at http://www.fathersrights.org/tactics.html "Bob Whiteside" wrote in message ... "fathersrights" wrote in message ... Me thinks you protest too much. If the materials weren't effective you feminists wouldnt hate them so much. You totally neglect all the FREE help for fathers available at http://www.fathersrights.org; And fathers,if you think custody law doesn"t control in custody cases, no wonder you lost your case. Free help that offers false hope is worthless. You have never been able to back up your claims when challenged by posters here who know better than to accept your statements at face value. Until you can back up your theories with facts and cites there is no way to consider your materials as being "effective". |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
denying visits
Case law is what was quoted in the original post. Common sense confirms the
courts ruling that you cant make a logical case to deny a parent the RIGHT to babysit over third parties. "Relayer" wrote in message ups.com... On Apr 6, 8:44?pm, "fathersrights" wrote: Me thinks you protest too much. If the materials weren't effective you feminists wouldnt hate them so much. You totally neglect all the FREE help for fathers available at http://www.fathersrights.org;And fathers,if you think custody law doesn"t control in custody cases, no wonder you lost your case."Gini" wrote in message news:QBrQh.2833$gb6.2603@trndny07... "Chris" wrote "fathersrights" wrote ................ NOT when the custodial parent is the mother. == Chris, fathersrights is a long time scammer/spammer who is a for-profit peddler of worthless crap to NCPs. If you feel compelled to engage him, please at least trim his posts to as not to perpetuate his BS.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - 999/1000 times custody is decided by case law, not state statute. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
denying visits
With your attitude you are guaranteed to lose which you obviously have if
you think this is false hope. "Bob Whiteside" wrote in message ... "fathersrights" wrote in message ... Me thinks you protest too much. If the materials weren't effective you feminists wouldnt hate them so much. You totally neglect all the FREE help for fathers available at http://www.fathersrights.org; And fathers,if you think custody law doesn"t control in custody cases, no wonder you lost your case. Free help that offers false hope is worthless. You have never been able to back up your claims when challenged by posters here who know better than to accept your statements at face value. Until you can back up your theories with facts and cites there is no way to consider your materials as being "effective". |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
6 mo dental visits | 00doc | Kids Health | 2 | April 3rd 05 04:11 PM |
NICU visits | DBB3 | Spanking | 14 | May 28th 04 01:58 PM |
dental visits? | Shena Delian O'Brien | Pregnancy | 37 | March 22nd 04 03:41 PM |
Should I suggest next visits? | Andrew | Single Parents | 4 | January 7th 04 03:25 PM |
Well child visits amidst the flu | Denise | General | 40 | December 14th 03 03:44 PM |