-
Petitioner & Respondent Separate
Petitioner & Respondent Separate.
Respondent & Girls move out of Midvale home -
Period: to
Petitioner - No Visitation
Petitioner leaves on 6 week tour
does not wish holiday visitation
does not see girls until Jan 7, 2008 -
Parenting Plan & Visitation
Petitioner & Respondent meet, agree visitation & parenting plan with step up based on Petitioner living arrangements, Petitioner begins visitation at request of Respondent Visitation: Petitioner 40, Respondent 60 -
Period: to
Visitation: P (35), R (65)
-
Petitioner files Summons
Petitioner obtains counsel & files Summons -
Ex Parte Hearing
Ex parte hearing about Lula running away, Custody evaluation orderedDCFS & Police investigation completed, report unfounded -
Halperin Custody Evaluation Report
Custody evaluation report submittedVisitation remains at P (35), R (65) while OSC continued -
Respondent loses job
Respondent loses her job of 5+ years with Orion Health, freelances for next 9 monthsVisitation remains at P (40, R (60) while OSC continued -
Respondent Deposition
Respondent deposedTemporary Custody Settlement at deposition for P(40), R(60) -
Respondent moves to Ohio
Respondent moves to Ohio, discussed settlement offers go unsignedOSC regarding Child Custody Evaluation moved to Jan 2010Visitation: P(80), R(20) -
Period: to
Visitation: P(80),R (20)
Respondent living in Ohio -
Respondent changes attorney
Respondent change of attorney (to self) -
Respondent begins plans to return to CA
works with her boss to finish role and find replacement, begins search -
Global Settlement Agreement Reached
Global settlement reached
was required to have summer visitation -
Petitioner begins dating Ms Holdorff
Petitioner begins dating Cindy Holdorff -
Respondent Returns to CA
Respondent gains employment with Astera, returns to CA, housesittingPetitioner tells Respondent can have girls, but only if does not modifyVisitation increases: P (70), R (30) -
Period: to
Visitation: P (75), R (25)
Petitioner, after saying R could see children more, said she had to earn it -
Period: to
Girls with Respondent
travel to PA for holidays with family -
Marriage Dissolution
-
Period: to
Visitation: P (60, R (40)
Respondent gives Petitioner more time, provided she not notify court -
Respondent moves, Visitation increases
Respondent moves into new CA homePetitioner virtually living with Ms. HoldorffVisitation becomes: P (60), R (40) -
Respondent layed off
Respondent loses employment with Astera -
Respondent Cohabitates with Robert May
Respondent moves in with Robert May, Larger home to accommodate children -
Petitioner moves, Resp. consulting
Petitioner moves in with Ms. Holdorff Respondent begins consulting for company she joins in Oct -
Respondent OSC filed
After several requests to meet and discuss modification, Respondent files OSC -
Period: to
R prohibits Visitation
Petitioner enforces 12/27/2010 court order re: custody & visitation Which states Respondent lives in OhioRespondent does not see children for one month -
Period: to
Visitation: P (60) R (40)
agreement with meet & confer for step-up -
Period: to
Visitation: P (60), R (40)
slightly less, but 40% agreed upon, step up plan never agreed -
Respondent Employed, Therapy Begins
Court Order filed, Child Therapy beginsRespondent employed by PingarVisitation: P (65), R (35) with meet & confer for step-up -
Respondent marries
Respond marries Robert May -
Meet & Confer Requested
Meet & confer for step-up requested -
Meet & confer for step-up re-requested
Meet & confer for step-up re-requested -
OSC hearing re:Halperin report
OSC hearing re: Halperin custody evaluationPotential move away. Judge Lewis recommends new evaluation, split equally in cost -
OSC Re:Support