Articles Posted in Custody case law

Recently, the Maryland appellate court ruled in the case of a father who appealed the finding that his child was a child in need of assistance (“CINA”). The master had recommended this finding to the court after a hearing in which it was shown that the mother and father failed to give their daughter an emotionally or physically safe environment. The court ordered that temporary custody of the child be given to the child’s maternal grandmother and a couple who had cared for the child in the past and in the present.

The master and the court had discovered some disturbing facts from a Department of Social Services (DSS) investigator before the CINA order was issued. The family lived in a trailer that needed to be repaired. The daughter had lost weight, had been left home alone with the family dog, needed medical care she did not receive, and was in an environment of regular domestic violence and alcohol and drug abuse.

DSS had learned of this family because the daughter had tested positive for the presence of cocaine when she was born. This meant that she was presumed to be not receiving proper care from her mother for one year after her birth and was a CINA. Continue reading

In Maryland, the court may appoint a “best interest” attorney for a child in a family law proceeding. He or she makes independent assessments of what is in the child’s best interest and advocates for these assessments in court. Sometimes one or both of the parents dispute these assessments.

In a 2010 case involving a best interest attorney, a native of the Philippines answered an ad placed by a United States citizen seeking a wife. They did not speak each other’s language very well. However, they married in 1996 and had three daughters. The wife filed for absolute divorce or in the alternative limited divorce. The Master found that the wife hadn’t been allowed to have contact with her daughters after she left.

At a pendente lite hearing, the court ordered that the wife could have visitation, that the husband had to pay her alimony and that the children needed to be represented by what’s called a “best interest” attorney to be paid by the father. The husband filed a motion to amend the orders, arguing visitation was not in the best interest of the children and that the therapist had concerns. He also said that the mother lived with someone who had a criminal record. The mother filed a motion for order of contempt arguing that the father wasn’t complying with the order. Continue reading

During a Maryland divorce, custody of the children can be one of the most heated topics. A custody case from last year illustrates how seriously Maryland takes these cases and the importance of working with an experienced attorney through the process.

A couple was married in Tennessee in 2001 and had two daughters. They separated in 2006 and the children alternated between which parent they lived with. The mother relocated to Jacksonville the next year. In 2008, the mother found out that one of the daughters had been sexually assaulted while in Florida by someone with whom the mother had a personal relationship.

The children went to live with their grandmother in Tennessee and came back to Florida later that year. Shortly thereafter, the mother’s cousin attacked her at her home and murdered someone nearby. The kids went back to Maryland to live with their father and his fiancé for the 2009-10 school year.

The hearing judge decided that the parties had actually agreed to allow the kids to live with the father indefinitely, though the mother insisted it was just for the year. The father filed for divorce and sought sole custody. The mother fabricated stories trying to take the children away from the father, including trying to obtain an order for emergency custody. Continue reading

What happens when a Maryland child wants to be adopted, but his biological parents are still hoping for reunification? Usually courts assume that continuing a parental relationship and eventual reunification is in the child’s best interests, but there are some circumstances in which it is appropriate to terminate the relationship.

In a recent case, the parent and child had different goals. The child in question was a five-year-old boy with two older siblings. The mother had been granted a protective order against the abusive father, and this prompted an investigation by the department of social services. Meanwhile, the mother expressed numerous paranoid claims to the police and jumped out of a window. She was sent to a psychiatric unit and when asked, claimed that the father and his mother had been trying to poison her. The kids were placed in a shelter.

The child and his siblings were found to be children in need of assistance (“CINA”) and he was separated from the other two when they were all placed in foster care. CINA proceedings happen when a department of social services is called regarding child abuse or neglect. The court must determine whether the allegations are true and determine which of five “permanency plans” is appropriate with reunification being the preferred plan. The court reviews this permanency plan every six months.

The social services department worked hard towards reunification. But the child spent 27 months in foster care (the majority of his life), and he did not progress towards reunification with his parents. Nor did his relatives get actively involved. As a result, the court changed the permanency plan to one of adoption by a non-relative. Continue reading

Child custody arrangements can be difficult under the best of circumstances, but when one parent’s circumstances change, arrangements that may have been appropriate just after the marriage or separation may no longer be suitable. In Maryland, the circuit court may modify a custody order when a parent’s circumstances change. What circumstances warrant a modification?

A two-step process is used to determine whether it is appropriate to modify a custody arrangement. First, is there a material change? By “material change,” the court means is there a change that affects the child’s welfare If so, the court must ask, what are the best interests of the child just as it did during the first custody hearing.

One material change that has occurred in some cases is the mental well-being of a parent. A parent with a major psychiatric condition may face more challenges parenting with the level of care than a parent who does not. Of course, since around 1 in 5 Americans have a diagnosed psychiatric condition, there are many parents with psychiatric conditions who need no intervention. There are, however, some who may be erratic in how they interact with their child and those cases require special attention and understanding from attorneys and judges. Continue reading

Maryland has a diverse population that includes many people from foreign countries and transplants from other states. Problems can arise when child custody arrangements are determined in other countries or other states within the United States, but must be implemented in Maryland. There have also been problems when parents or family members look for more favorable custody decisions in another jurisdiction. In order to combat competition between states for control of custody issues, in 2004, the Maryland Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act (MUCCJE) was enacted (replacing the Maryland Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction Act.)

Under the MUCCJEA, a circuit court in Maryland has jurisdiction to hear a child custody complaint if Maryland is the home state of the child. Ordinarily Maryland honors child custody determinations made in foreign countries, but it is not required to do so if the child custody laws of the other country violate fundamental principles of human rights. Continue reading

Family law cases regarding child custody frequently turn on the best interests of the child. While parents have a Fourteenth Amendment right to raise their children without the State’s interference, this isn’t an absolute right. It must be balanced against society’s responsibility towards the child’s welfare.

In Maryland, when children are abused or neglected by their parents or have a disability that their parents are not able to attend to, social services may ask the juvenile court to designate them “children in need of assistance” or “CINA”. The court must make factual findings as to whether the allegations of social services are correct and determine a course of action to protect the child.

Continue reading

The Court of Special Appeals recently agreed to hear a child custody case and then dismissed the case for being moot. One justice dissented, noting that the case presented an issue that is likely to pop up repeatedly, but this issue will not be able to be reviewed in a timely fashion by the appellate court because of procedural timelines. Even though the dissent is not precedent that can be cited, it is important because it highlights a potential problem in child custody cases that the public needs to have resolved.

In the instant case, the court was asked to decide whether it is appropriate for a circuit court to pursue a termination of parental rights case when a child in need of assistance (CINA) order was issue, but was being appealed. A child in need of assistance is a child that needs intervention (1) because of abuse or neglect or a developmental disorder and (2) because his or her parents, guardian or custodian are not able to give proper care.

In this case, a baby boy was born prematurely. He had severe health problems, including prenatal exposure to HIV, which required him to stay at the hospital. The mother had been diagnosed and hospitalized for multiple psychiatric conditions and had used drugs and alcohol. When the baby was born, she was brought to a psychiatric unit. The baby’s father had a substance abuse problem and was convicted for more than once drug-related crime. Continue reading

In Guidash v. Tome, the Court of Special Appeals of Maryland ruled on whether a circuit court had erred in its factual findings in a child support case. The case arose from a couple’s 1991 marriage. The couple had two children. By 2001, the marriage was over and the couple entered into a separation and property settlement agreement. The separation agreement gave the parties joint legal and physical custody of the kids such that they lived 3 days with their father and 4 with their mother.

The agreement also permitted the mother to live in the marital home for 10 years, during which time the father was responsible for the mortgage, taxes and insurance. The father kept the kids on his medical insurance policy and paid half their medical expenses. The mother agreed to transfer her interest in the marital home to the husband for $25,000 and waived any interest in his pension for $20,000. The parties agreed there would be no child support because of the decisions made regarding the marital home. The agreement expressly provided a court could not modify this agreement.

Afterward, the husband filed a divorce complaint with the separation agreement attached as an exhibit. The court granted the divorce and incorporated the separation agreement into its judgment. From 2001-2011, the mother and the kids lived in the marital home. The husband abided by the terms of the agreement, paying the requisite sums. Continue reading