Custody and Child Support

Child custody disputes pose significant challenges in family law, causing suffering when parents fail to reach an agreement. Examining the case of In re: Andre J. (2014), it highlights a scenario where a child, due to maternal neglect, was placed in foster care with a reunification plan. As the plan proved unattainable, a court-ordered APPLA (another planned permanent living arrangement) was granted, emphasizing the critical role of effective legal representation in custody cases.

In the case of Placella v. Placella (2016), the father made a last-minute emergency request for continuance, because of illness and the sudden dismissal of his counsel, and that request was initially denied. In the end, however, he succeeded in obtaining his continuance. How did this happen? Let’s take a closer look at this importance case.

In the case of Maciejewski v. Sutton (2018), a mother challenged a custody modification, alleging a violation of her constitutional right to due process. The court upheld that due process cannot be ignored, emphasizing that even if the outcome might have been the same, proper notice was necessary. The modification was overturned, highlighting the significance of observing due process rights in child custody cases.

In the case of K.M. v. C.D. (2017), a custody dispute saw a procedural error at the trial court level where inadmissible hearsay evidence was allowed. Despite acknowledging the error, the appellate judge upheld the trial court decision, emphasizing that the error had no substantial impact on the ruling and followed the appropriate standard of review in family law cases. The mother won the appellate court's decision despite the acknowledged procedural error at the trial court level.

In the case of Boone v. Youngbar (2016), the Maryland court faced a paternity dispute where a couple, despite signing an "affidavit of parentage" and sharing custody, had uncertainties about parentage. The mother later alleged a different biological father, but the court, emphasizing the significance of the affidavit, denied her request for a new DNA paternity test. The court held that the boyfriend's consistent acknowledgment and involvement with the child, along with the absence of fraud or duress, upheld his parentage status.

The case of David A., et al. v. Karen S. (2019) in Maryland family law establishes a precedent where a non-biological "de facto" parent, specifically the maternal grandmother, was granted full legal and primary physical custody of a child deemed unfit for the biological parents. Notably, the court also awarded the de facto parent attorney fees, totaling $57,000, signaling a significant development. This case clarifies that non-biological parents can be eligible for attorney fee awards, contingent on the court's official recognition of their "de facto" status, thereby equalizing their standing with biological parents in pursuing such fees.

In the Rosemann v. Salsbury Clements (2010) case, the Maryland Court of Appeals addressed whether funds from a personal injury settlement could be used to satisfy back child support payments. Despite the husband's attempt to attach the settlement funds, the court ruled that personal injury settlement income is not eligible for garnishment under the relevant statute. This decision underscores the legal protection of certain types of income in child support cases, illustrating the complexity of enforcing such obligations.

The case of Burak v. Burak is a rare example of paternal grandparents gaining full custody of a child due to the parents' problematic behavior, including a polyamorous relationship and drug abuse. The grandparents, who had actively participated in the child's life, successfully demonstrated their positive influence, leading the court to decide that custody with them was in the child's best interests. Despite a strong presumption favoring parents in custody cases, this decision showcases the significant hurdle grandparents face when seeking custody. The court also established a child support order, justifying the amount based on state guidelines, despite the wife's complaint about its perceived excessiveness.

Americans have evolved in their perception of pets, considering them as family members rather than mere possessions. In Maryland, the law still views pets as property during divorces, unlike in Washington, D.C., where pets are treated more like children. In Maryland, pets are appraised similarly to other assets in divorce proceedings. Valuation might be a concern for rare or highly trained animals, but generally, pets are equitably distributed based on monetary value. To prevent conflicts, couples are advised to use contracts, either before or during marriage, to establish pet ownership and responsibilities, allowing for a more personalized and agreeable arrangement.

Courts prioritize the best interests of the child in custody decisions, considering factors such as the child's welfare and the parent's circumstances. In the case of Holbrook v. Newell, the appellate court granted the father full custody, emphasizing that the child's well-being outweighed the parents' living arrangements.

Virtual visitation is the use of video conferencing technology to allow non-custodial parents to have contact with their children in the context of divorce and child custody. Although it is not meant to replace in-person visitation, it is becoming increasingly popular and recognized by courts as a legitimate form of personal contact between parents and children. However, there are concerns about the potential abuse of virtual visitation by custodial parents, who may use it as leverage to relocate and cut out valuable in-person visitation between children and noncustodial parents.

A parent's various characteristics – i.e., job, education, relationships, economic condition, etc. – can impact custody orders to the extent that they affect the child's best interests. In the case of Wettlaufer v. Wettlaufer (2016), a parent's mental health status played a role in the initial custody order. Let's look closely at this case and see how mental health can affect custody determinations.

Regarding child custody in Maryland family law, the law essentially operates according to many fixed principles, chief among those is the “best interests of the child standard.” This principle reigns supreme in child custody, regardless of whatever factual scenario unfolds.

In many cases, divorced spouses end up paying both alimony awards and child support. This circumstance can happen easily whenever a couple has children. We will discuss the case of Nusbaum v. Nusbaum, a case which, among other things, demonstrates the hassles which can follow whenever someone falls behind on their obligations.

In this post, we're going to discuss a few tips for custodial parents who plan to move out of Maryland.