Irina Litvinovich
Link for opinion: https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=16602325417811134539&q=involving+child+visitation+2014+Minnesota&hl=en&as_sdt=4,24&as_ylo=2015
Title:
Minnesota: Court of Appeals holds that J.S is not entitled to Child Custody any
longder
The Minnesota Court of Appeals held in IN THE MATTER OF WELFARE OF CHILDREN OF JS, Minn: Court of Appeals 2015 that J.S who is the mother of S.M who was born on October 9, 1999 and A.M who was born on March 15, 2002 and the ex-wife of P.M, who is the biological father of the children was not entitled to permanent legal and physical custody of her children which got transferred to her ex-husband P.M.
J.S challenged the transfer arguing that the county should have allowed the two children to testify at the trial and that she should have been given another six months to work on her case plan because the rulings were an abuse of the district court.
The court argued that they did not abuse its discretion. J.S failed to appear for random drug testing on two occasions, refused to participate in in-patient treatment as well forgot to complete a psychological evaluation. She also did not appear to visits with her children nor did she go to family counseling. Adding on additional six months, which was what J.S was requesting the court to do, would not have helped her work on her case plan. P.M on the other hand, according to the social worker, complied with all case planning and even exceeded what was asked for.
The district court concluded that P.M. has provided
the children with a “safe and stable home and that he has a “strong bond” with
the children which presuming that he will act in the best interest of the
children. He has “substantially completed,” and “gone above and beyond” on his
case plan. The court did not abuse anything by transferring the legal and
physical custody of the children to P.M instead of J.S. This case was affirmed.
Labels for the post: custody, transfer of custody,
visitation, father
No comments:
Post a Comment