Ah, reviewing the paperwork - her lawyer is the one who filed for mediation, not W herself. She stated the grounds as such:
Quote:
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:
Quote:
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.
"You can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into."
Damn, I wouldn't want to go up against you in court, son.
No way.
Puppy
My attorney has dropped the ball and allowed them to get back on their feet. I'm just doing cleanup duty. Waiting to hear from him today to see if he is willing to make these arguments.
Regardless, something fishy is going on in terms of the attorneys playing the game together. I spoke to W last week (which probably kicked off the firestorm) and during that conversation she stated she was completely unaware of what was happening in her case.
She is aware enough to tell her attorney to file accusations, etc. randomly. But apparently not aware enough to understand that she isn't going to 'win' anything by doing so.
In either case, things are moving forward, which is a good thing in my opinion.
Anyway...
D1 was doing well this morning. She was playing with some toys and just glanced at me when I walked in. I sat down and played with her for a few minutes. I picked her up and gave her a big hug. I asked her to blow me a kiss and she did. Then I put her down.
She walked to play with some toys, and I began easing out the door. She came running after me and I said "I'm just playing with the door." and closed it and she stopped and turned around and went to go play. Then I snuck out.
"You can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into."
D1 was doing well this morning. I rolled some beach balls around to her and played peek-a-boo in a toy tunnel. She began crying when I left, but W came in and cheered her up.
I am firing my attorney tomorrow. I have met with a more expensive attorney who has successfully litigated in front of this Judge in the past for fathers and has practiced in front of him for years.
He finally filed one of my motions after tweaking. I am tired of being dicked around. Guarantee there are ethical breaches all over the place on this one.
"You can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into."
I tend to agree -- good move. You seemed really frustrated, and -- frankly -- seemed to know more (and have better instincts) than he did.
Puppy
Well, the one thing separating he and I is that I've won custody as a father before - he has never won custody for a father. Yet I'm supposed to listen to his rendition of what my chances are.
I told him today: Fortes fortuna adiuvat
He needs to do what I say and let me worry about the consequences.
"You can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into."
I sent him my notice of discharge and an email instructing him to prepare a motion to withdraw. I kept it "professionally courteous" and didn't seek to air out my complaints. Just stated in essence: "I have elected to retain other counsel who has litigated and won custody for fathers in front of Judge [name] in the past."
I'm still walking in at 4 this evening to request my case file, correspondence between him and the other attorney, my evidence, etc.
Anyway, D1 was doing well this morning. She ran up to me going "DA DA" and reached up towards me to pick her up. We did the sitting on the window sill thing again, and some of the other kids came up to get me to help them put their shoes on.
I was able to sneak out this morning without her noticing, so no crying this time.
I spoke to the guy I want to represent me, he stated the same arguments I've told my current attorney to make in a 30 second phone call - which my attorney refuses to follow.
I think I'll be much happier with a change of pace.
"You can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into."
