Non-Custodial Parent: Case Study

Each year about 1.2 million marriages end in divorce, and many divorcing couples have children (Patel&Jones, 2008). In the year 2006 more than 1.1 million children were living with a parent who was divorced or separated. Though most parents face the challenges associated with divorce or separation in a healthy and successful manner without high-conflict interactions. However, according to Patel and Jones about 10% of divorce cases involving children disagreement on custody and visitation arrangements leads to litigation(2008). In these cases, it is often left to the court to make decisions about custody, and several custody cases are referred to court-appointed mental health experts during the process.

Refer to Fact Pattern 29-1B. If Michael imposes a lien on Jill’s car, it will end

In her article “The Myth of Co-Parenting: How It Was Supposed to Be. How It Was”, author Hope Edelman claims that perhaps the ideal, balanced, and harmonious marriage that many couples yearn for is merely an unachievable myth. Edelman’s anger and frustration drives her essay as she recounts her childhood, analyzes societal gender roles, and narrates her own relationship in order to explore the concept of shared responsibility in a marriage.

26.1)Mechanic's Lien. Ironwood Exploration, Inc. (Ironwood) owned a lease on oil and gas property located in Duchesne County, Utah. Ironwood contracted to have Lantz Drilling and Exploration Company, Inc. (Lantz), drill an oil well on the property. Therafter, Lantz rented equipment from Graco Fishing and Rental Tools, Inc. (Graco), for use in drilling the well. Graco billed Lantz for these rentals, but Lantz did not pay. Graco filed a notice of mechanic's lien on the well in the amount of $19,766. Ironwood, which had paid Lantz, refused to pay Graco. Graco sued to forclose on its

Before I start I would like to thank every single person that has helped me during this difficult process. I am writing to request a permanent hardship reassignment to the port of Orlando (MCO). At this point, I have run out of option and my child custody situation is only getting worse.

On October 22, 2014, the FIDM lien was requested in accordance with the Code of Alabama 1975 30-3, 30-3-197 and 30-3-198. On October 23, 2014, the Secretary of State acknowledged the lien and the levy was requested. On the same day, the Notice of Levy was sent to the financial institution. On October 27, 2014, the levy package was generated for the NCP. On December 9, 2014, the Lien Unit received a notice from the Navy Federal Credit Union that account numbers 3019677362, 3044625709, 7034239553, and 3044624900; the accounts have zero funds for payment. The levy was released; it was re-added due to the account on the FIDM screen; not listed on notice having funds. On that same day, the FIDM levy was released on the account #530116705. Again, on that day, the FIDM levy was requested and the notice was sent to the financial institution. On December 11, 2014, the FIDM Levy package was produced. On February 25, 2015, the NCP contacted the Lien Unit and stated that he had sent a statement of benefits letter from social security about two weeks ago. The Lien Unit told him that they had not received the information and requested the NCP to send the information and the Request for a Review Form via fax to expedite the process. On March 20, 2015, the Lien Unit contacted the NCP; he stated he mailed the statement from social security about a month ago and wanted confirmation that it was received. The NCP was advised that no documents had been received. Again, the Lien Unit requested the NCP to fax in the documents. On March 25, 2015, through contact of voice mail, the Lien Unit requested the NCP’s last three months bank statements on the account affected by the lien or where the social security benefits are deposited. Later that day, the Lien Unit informed the NCP that the Social Security Administration

The Lien Trial has been set for September 21, 2017 at 8:30 a.m. before Judge Richard Ellis. As previously noted, the lien claimants have a high burden to meet in order to substantiate their services. All the lien claimants have put the applicant, Pedro Sanchez, as a witness. The applicant will need to be present in order to establish AOE/COE. Whether the lien claimants will be able to get the applicant to appear for the Lien Trial is uncertain.

On September 16, 2015, the attorney, Rachel Macon, became involved in the case and requested an administrative review. On October 7, 2015, the hearing officer advised the Lien Unit that the acknowledgment of hearing request has been accepted. The original hearing was scheduled for January 5, 2016. On January 6, 2016, the Lien Unit received a letter from the hearing officer rescheduling hearing for March 10, 2016. On March 10, 2016, the hearing was continued until May 19, 2016. On May 19, 2016, the Lien Unit received partial information to verify that the account that was levied is a joint account. The Lien Unit has spoken with the attorney and the NCP about providing additional information regarding the joint account so that the Lien Unit can complete the calculations on the account. That is all at this

Jefferson County DHR representative’s testimony revealed that the custodial parent (CP), Peggy Butler, made an application with the department to enforce the Jefferson County, Alabama divorce order DR-2003-2290, which includes the minor children, Michael Walker (DOB 2/12/1996) and Heather Walker (DOB 11/11/1998). The court order of November 2003, ordered that the defendant shall pay to the plaintiff $905.00 per month for the support and maintenance of the minor children commencing on July 1, 2003. This was not a per child order. On February 2, 2015, the child, Michael Walker, emancipated at the age of 19. Therefore, the current support continued at

Lee County DHR’s testimony revealed that the case with the non-custodial parent (NCP), Mr. Harley, begin back in 1992 when the custodial parent(CP), Wanda Marshall, applied for services to establish a paternity order, income withholding (IWO), and medical. An order was establish and the NCP was paying. On July 9, 2008, the CP requested enforcement; DHR took legal action and filed contempt against the NCP because he had not made a payment since April 2008. The NCP appeared in court and paid $400.00; the court dismissed the review because an IWO had been mailed and payments was been received through the IWO. On November 5, 2010, a contempt action was filed again, due to the NCP not paying since August 2010. On January 5, 2011, the NCP

Please consider this cover letter as part of the attached Offer in Compromise, provided by our clients, Tindini P/L as trustee for M & D Wood Family Trust and Wayne Santini, on behalf of Jet Boats, USA, Inc. (“Jet Boats”). On July 27, 2017, the California Department of Taxation and Fee Administration filed a personal property tax lien against Jet Boat’s vessel named Bruce, Official Number 1253648, HIN MTF329511313 (the “Vessel”), for Jet Boats’ failure to pay a use tax after bringing the Vessel into the State of California. Our clients hold a $354,375 Secured Promissory Note (the “Note”) secured by a Preferred Ship Mortgage (the “Mortgage”) over the Vessel. The Mortgage, executed on June 8, 2014, is senior to your tax lien. (See T.M. Cobb

The final judgment of divorce was in effect May 10, 2011. The agreement attached to the divorce stated that the custodial parent (CP) was granted sole custody of their child, Nathan Allen Parvin, date of birth May 29, 2009. The judge ordered the NCP to pay $300.00 a month for support and maintenance of the minor child to the CP. The said support payments were to begin August 1, 2011. Jefferson County DHR received materials from Idaho in December 2015 requesting the agency to enforce the said divorce order. In reviewing the said divorce order, the agency completed a review of the NCP’s balances binding that the order stated the payments were to begin April 2011; the first payment received and recorded was June 2011. After the review, there were no payments received in April nor in May, which resulted in the arrears and the interest. The interest accrues on the unpaid balance. Therefore, for those two months the agency did not receive payments. The remaining month’s payments from not only DHR’s records, but also the Alabama Office of Courts, and the clerk’s office were considered. Now, the total balance is $1,041.53, which includes $300.00 due for the month of October 2106, arrears of $657.84, and interest of $222.15 as of today. The last payment that the agency received was dated for October 4, 2016 at $138.46. That is

On October 15, 2014, the Secretary of State acknowledged the lien and the levy was requested. On October 20, 2014, the Notice of Levy was sent to the financial institution. On October 27, 2014, the levy package was generated to the NCP. On October 31, 2014, the CP closed the child support case in the county office. On December 22, 2014, the CP reopened the child support case; all enforcement efforts including the lien were reinstated. On January 5, 2015, a second FIDM lien was requested based on the same Child Support Policy and Procedures Manual that qualified the NCP qualified for a lien/levy. On January 6, 2015, the Secretary of State acknowledged the lien. On January 15, 2015, the Lien Unit received a Notice from National Indemnity stating they cannot locate a file for the NCP in response to the first levy that the Lien Unit sent in October. On January 21, 2015, the levy was requested and the Notice of Levy was sent to the financial institution. On January 23, 2015, a new levy package was generated to the NCP. On February 13, 2015, a third Levy was requested and the Notice of Levy was sent to the financial institution. On February 17, 2015, the NCP requested an administrative review based on him

For almost two years, Raleigh city leaders have debated the best approach towards short-term renting services like Airbnb and VRBO.

The concept of family is often debated within society due to its social structure. For a long time family was most often defined as people who are linked through blood and genes. With todays “modern family” the concept is created by marriage, blood, adoption or long lasting friendships. In this case we have the biological parents vs. foster parents. Assessing the situation through the Care-Based theory, the courts made the right decision by giving the child back to the biological parents. I have seen the pain that a parent has gone through when losing a child because of an addiction. Although myself and other will feel awful for taking the child from the foster parents, they too have to consider the “what if’s?” How would they feel if the situation