Mr. J hired Cantor Law Group to file a Petition for Dissolution against his wife (Mrs. J). At the very beginning of the action, Mrs. J filed an Emergency Motion with the court to allow her to relocate to Florida with the parties’ two young children. The evidentiary hearing regarding Mrs. J’s request to relocate to Florida was scheduled during a period of time that the main lawyer would be out of the country, and another member of the Cantor Law Group teamstepped in to cover the hearing.
At the time of the hearing, Mrs. J asked not only that she be permitted to move the children over 2000 miles from Mr. J, but she also asked that Mr. J pay her spousal maintenance and child support, that he pay her attorney fees in the matter and that he pay 100% of the travel costs for his visitation with the children in Florida. After the hearing, the Judge ruled in Mr. J’s favor, denying Mrs. J’s request to relocate the children to Florida and designating Mr. J as the primary residential parent for the children with Mrs. J receiving parenting time only during the children’s school breaks.
Additionally, the assigned Judge denied Mrs. J’s requests for spousal maintenance, child support and attorney fees and did not find it appropriate for Mr. J to pay all of the travel costs since Mrs. J was the party who decided to leave the state of Arizona. This was a victory for Mr. J, but most importantly, a prime example of the teamwork and abilities of each attorney in this firm to step in and assist one another in the successful advocacy required by such a complex and adversarial case.
Father was being denied contact with his 2 young girls. The Mother had given the 11 year old and 7 year old the impression that they could decide whether or not to spend time with their Father. Father then retained us to restore his contact with both girls and increase his parenting time. Mother’s uncooperative behavior throughout the litigation was ongoing. Even after she retained an attorney, she continued her ongoing refusal to facilitate and encourage our client’s parenting time, making serious allegations against our client to justify her behavior.
By the time that we got to the trial, 10 long months had passed and Father had missed-out on substantial time with his daughters. During the trial, Mother’s attorney attempted every “trick in the book,” to try and convince the Court that Mother’s obstruction was justified, due to her allegations against Father. However, after a 3 hour trial where both sides of the case were presented to the Court, the Judge issued a detailed Ruling on the record that supported all of our arguments during the trial. Further, the Court specifically found that Mother’s allegations of drug use, significant domestic violence and mental illness, were unsubstantiated.
Our client won in a landslide: he was granted sole legal custody of both children. In addition, he was granted the parenting time that he was requesting. The Court also warned and assured Mother that, if the parties appeared before the Court again and Father had not seen the children, that Mother would leave the Courtroom in handcuffs. Finally, the client was granted an award of attorneys fees and costs.
Father retained a [Cantor Law Group] attorney to represent him in a divorce involving two minor children, ages 11 and 6. Father was very active in the children’s lives taking them to extracurricular activities, coaching little league, cooking their meals and driving them to school. Mother was equally involved in their lives as well.
At the initial court hearing, the parties agreed to joint legal custody and equal parenting time under a 5-2-2-5 plan. Subsequently, Mother changed her mind and sought primary custody, requesting that Father have limited parenting time of an after school visit and every other weekend. Mother refused to relent, going so far as to request the appointment of a mental health expert to conduct a custody evaluation. [Cantor Law Group] attorney successfully convinced the Court to deny this motion.
At trial, Father requested that the Court continue the 5-2-2-5 parenting plan as in the children’s best interest and to maximize his current and future involvement in the children’s lives. Mother continued to seek primary custody with limited parenting time for Father, going so far as to claim Father’s outside activities such as golf impacted his worthiness for the parenting time he was requesting.
The [Cantor Law Group] attorney successfully convinced the Court to enter an Order of an EQUAL ACCESS parenting plan as most appropriate. The Court noted that Mother had not overcome the burden of Arizona’s public policy to promote strong families and strong family values.
Father was elated that he will be able to continue to be a 50-50 parent.