Removing a Child to another Jurisdiction after a Divorce

A court can grant leave or permission to a person who has
custody of a minor child to remove the minor child from the
current jurisdiction to live in another jurisdiction. The
determining factor on whether or not to allow removal is
the best interest of the child standard. The party seeking
the right to remove has the burden of showing that the
removal is in the best interest of the minor child. To
temporarily remove a child from the jurisdiction, the party
doing the removal shall inform the other parent or parent's
attorney. The removing party shall also provide telephone
contact information as well as a prospective date of
return. If the removal is to another part of the same
state, the custodial party is not required to seek court
permission. There are several factors that are considered
when determining the child's best interest and include:
Will the move enhance the life of the child and of the
custodial parent? Is the removal simply an effort to
frustrate visitation with the non-custodial parent? What is
the motive of the non-custodial parent in frustrating the
removal? The court must consider the child's interest in
having a healthy can close relationship with both parents
as well as other family members. The visitation rights of
the non-custodial parent must be considered. Will
visitation be realistic and feasible?

A full consideration of the benefits that a child can
derive from the financial and emotional well-being of a
custodial parent is required. Courts may allow removal
when the custodial parent remarries a person from another
state. The child may benefit by having the custodial
parent closer to the new spouse.

A better job opportunity has also been used as grounds for
removal. The increased earnings will allow for a better
lifestyle for the child. Currently, there has been a trend
against removal. The emphasis seems to be placed more
directly on the best interest of the child and less on the
opportunity of the custodial parent.

If the non-custodial parent has been highly involved in the
child's life, removal would be very difficult to obtain and
would provide a hardship to the entire family. The conduct
of the non-custodial parent is a major factor in whether or
not to allow removal. If the non-custodial parent is
absent from the child's life, the court will be more likely
to grant the removal.


----------------------------------------------------
David M. Siegel is an attorney practicing divorce and
family law. Additional information is available at
http://www.divorce-lawyers-newyork.com .

Case Study: Once Again Allstate Tries To Avoid Paying A Legitimate Claim

In November 2003, 36 year-old Christina Hoover* was driving
in the west bound lanes of Interstate 90 about 2 miles west
of Cle Elum. Her husband was riding in the front passenger
seat. The defendant, Sally Hinkle, was driving her vehicle
in the adjacent lane but 3 to 4 car lengths ahead. The
defendant then suddenly changed lanes in front of Ms.
Hoover, causing her to lose control, spin 180 degrees and
come to a stop sideways in the middle lane. Following
behind was a 33 foot motor home towing a Jeep truck. The
motor home could not stop in time and T-boned Ms. Hoover's
vehicle sending it spinning back into the cement jersey
barrier.

The defendant was insured by Allstate Insurance Company.
Allstate's lawyer denied that the defendant was responsible
for causing the collision and claimed that a trucker moved
into her lane, causing the defendant to make an emergency
lane change into Ms. Hoover's lane.

Mr. Davis tracked down the motor home driver and his wife.
These witnesses did not support the defendant's version of
the accident. They stated that the defendant made an abrupt
lane change without being forced over by the truck. Mr.
Davis also took the deposition of the Washington State
Patrol Trooper who investigated the collision. The Trooper
also stated that truck driver had nothing to do with
causing the collision and that the defendant was solely to
blame. Despite these witness accounts, Allstate refused to
concede liability thereby forcing Ms. Hoover to go to trial.

Ms. Hoover received severe "whiplash" injuries to her
cervical spine. An MRI revealed "cervical kyphosis" or the
abnormal curvature of the spine. The MRI also showed a
"disc protrusion" or herniation at C5-6. Ms. Hoover could
not return to work as a self-employed cleaning lady. She
incurred medical expenses of approximately $23,000 over a 3
year period.

Before a lawsuit was filed Ms. Hoover was willing to accept
$25,000 to settle her claim, but Allstate refused. Several
months after filing suit, Ms. Hoover again offered to
accept $25,000 to settle her claim. Allstate refused again.

The jury found that Ms. Hinkle was 100% responsible for
causing the accident and rejected her claim that the truck
driver was at fault. The jury's verdict was for $379,664.
The judge then awarded attorney fees and expenses of
$107,887, bringing the total verdict to $487,550.

The plaintiff was represented by her attorney Christopher
Michael Davis of Bellevue. Allstate hired John C. Moore of
Seattle to defendant Ms. Hinkle. *Names have been changed
to protect our client's privacy.


----------------------------------------------------
Mr. Davis is the founder of the Davis Law Group. He brings
over 15 years of practical yet innovative experience to
personal injury cases. He practices law in Seattle, WA.
http://www.InjuryTrialLawyer.com .

What is the Role of the Chapter 7 Trustee?

Once a Chapter 7 bankruptcy case is filed, an impartial
case trustee is appointed by the office of the United
States Trustee. (In Alabama and North Carolina, the
trustee is appointed by the court). The primary function
of the Chapter 7 trustee is to administer the case and
liquidate your non-exempt assets. In most cases, your
assets are completely exempt and there is no property for
the trustee to administer. The trustee will liquidate your
non-exempt assets in a manner that maximizes the return to
your unsecured creditors. The trustee can also pursue
causes of action that you may have at the time your
bankruptcy case is filed. A common cause of action is one
to recover money or property that is owed to you.

The trustee also has strong avoiding powers. This allows a
trustee to set aside preferential transfers made to
creditors prior to your bankruptcy filing. This avoiding
power may result in proceeds being distributed to unsecured
creditors.

In addition to liquidating any non-exempt assets, the
trustee has the duty of making sure that you have complied
with the numerous bankruptcy laws that are enumerated
throughout the Bankruptcy Code.

The trustee is often a local bankruptcy attorney; however,
a trustee is not required to be an attorney. You can rest
assured that the trustee will be a person who is very
knowledgeable about Chapter 7, the court process and all of
the necessary procedures to administer a case.

The trustee is mostly interested in what property you own,
whether it can be exempted under the Federal or State laws
and whether or not it can be administered for the benefit
of creditors. The trustee has a vested interest in the
property because he is partially paid on commission.
That's right; the trustee may receive 25% of the first
$5,000.00 administered, 10% of any amount between $5,000.00
and $50,000.00, and 5% of any additional amounts
administered.

Many debtors wonder whether or not the trustee will want to
search their homes for property. Although this is
possible, it is highly unlikely. The trustee would have to
believe that the debtor was not being truthful in his
schedules or otherwise not complying with the trustee's
requests.

The Chapter 7 Trustee's Work

The trustee will review the petition and schedules that you
filed. He will review the exemptions to see if there is
any property that can be administered. He will check your
statement of intentions with regard to secured property and
to leases. At the meeting of creditors, the trustee will
investigate your financial affairs.

He will review your attorney's fees to see if they are in
compliance with local standards for fees. If the fee paid
by you was excessive, the trustee may bring a motion to
have those fees reviewed by the court. To the extent that
the fee is determined to be excessive, the court may order
cancellation of the fee agreement or order that a portion
of the fees be refunded to you.

He will check your state issued I.D. as well as your social
security card. If there is a problem regarding those
items, the trustee will report same to the United States
Trustee.

If you miss your required meeting of creditors, the trustee
may set a continued date or he may move to have your case
dismissed.

Don't be alarmed by what the trustee does and what the
trustee can do. In the majority of cases, the debtor's
dealings with the trustee are limited to the relatively
short meeting of creditors.


----------------------------------------------------
David M. Siegel is the author of Chapter 7 Success: The
Complete Guide to Surviving Personal Bankruptcy. He is a
member of the American Bankruptcy Institute and currently
practices bankruptcy law in Chicago and its surrounding
suburbs. Additional information is available at
http://www.bankruptcy-lawyers-losangeles.com .