WAW/Affair Exposed - Advice? #3

[DCBHM]

Ah, reviewing the paperwork - her lawyer is the one who filed for mediation, not W herself. She stated the grounds as such:

1. The case is currently set for trial on September 17, 2009.

2. The instant case involves one minor child, no assets, and no liabilities of the parties.

3. The only issue for this Honorable Court to decide is the issue of custody of the minor child, who is approximately 14 months old.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests that this Honorable Court:

A. Set this matter for a hearing on the issue of mediation;

B. Order the parties to mediation with the costs to be divided equally.

Now... under our state law, the party requesting mediation has to pay for it if the other doesn't agree. Besides that though - she has dropped all claims to anything outside of custody which I find interesting. I had pretty much won all those arguments anyway.

Of course, I spent this morning writing my own response:

1. That the allegation made in Paragraph 1 is admitted.

2. That the allegation made in Paragraph 2 is admitted. By way of further response, the Defendant states that if Plaintiff’s allegations of domestic violence and fearing for her life made in her Motion for Psychological Evaluation of the Defendant are true, mediation would not be in the best interests of the parties’ minor child or the Plaintiff according to state law unless she requests it directly through her attorney and not on her attorney’s own motion.

3. Defendant denies the allegation in Paragraph 3 and demands strict proof thereof. By way of further response, Defendant notes that the Plaintiff brought this cause before this Honorable Court alleging fault grounds of “Mental and Physical Cruelty” and “Adultery” and believes the Plaintiff has a constitutional right to resolve her dispute in the court system by presenting evidence in support of these allegations. Furthermore, the Defendant believes he has a constitutional right to trial regarding his fault ground of “Adultery” as well due to his religious beliefs and is prepared to present his evidence which includes an under oath admission by the Plaintiff, audio recordings, as well as third party corroboration of disposition and opportunity through video evidence and testimony, because he believes this relationship has an adverse effect on the best interests of his daughter due to admissions made by the Plaintiff in her deposition regarding her paramour, OM’s practice of self-mutilation, alcoholism, and violent temper.

4. That the Plaintiff has proved unwilling to compromise on issues which should be straightforward. The Plaintiff’s emotional or mental inability to reach the smallest compromise in parenting includes withholding prior agreed visitation from the paternal grandfather, who has only seen his granddaughter a few times, on Valentine’s Day, as well as restricting the ability of the Defendant to have access to his child on Father’s Day – which even the standard unsupervised visitation schedule in [county] County would have allowed. Furthermore, the Plaintiff would not allow the Defendant to take his daughter somewhere for lunch on Father’s Day for even an hour.

5. That on multiple occasions the Defendant has approached the Plaintiff directly with a desire to handle these matters outside the legal process, through counseling, co-parenting classes, divorce mediation counseling, with a willingness to resolve the dispute by coming up with an agreement they could both live with – only to be rebuffed on each occasion. Defendant has recorded some of these conversations and will prepare them for the Court if requested.

6. Defendant avers that the very same emotional and psychological issues which he suspected when presenting his Motion for Psychological Evaluation of the Plaintiff may be the root cause of continued litigation and would make mediation impractical, futile, a waste of time and not in the best interests of his minor child, D1 or of either party financially.

WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, Defendant moves this Honorable Court to order the following:

A. That [Attorney]’s Motion for Mediation be denied.

B. That the Court award the Defendant such other, further or different relief to which he may, in equity, be entitled.

I sort of tongue in cheek mocked them for not having any evidence of alleged violence in #s 2 and 3, but otherwise listed my own reasons for not seeing mediation as practical.

Hell, I'm perfectly willing to compromise. But tell me if you think mediation would be a good idea after what I listed.