MAURICE FRANKS
Attorney at Law
POST OFFICE BOX 281
BATON ROUGE, LOUISIANA
U.S.A. 70821-0281

(800) 227-5345

15 October 1998

Ms. Carol Paulsen
Suite 3
6298 Westheimer Road
Houston, Texas 77057

Dear Carol,

I have reviewed your case and the applicable provisions of Texas law. As you know, I am not licensed to practice law in Texas, and therefore must suggest that you work with your Texas attorney in exploring the feasibility of the suggestions I now make.

I am disturbed that the present joint conservatorship is not working well for Christopher. I feel the facts justify filing the following motions:

1. Motion to Modify and Terminate Joint Managing Conservatorship and to Restrict and Supervise Possessory Conservatorship

2. Affidavit in Support of Motion to Modify and Terminate Joint Managing Conservatorship and to Restrict and Supervise Possessory Conservatorship

3. Motion for Mental Examination, Treatment and Costs

4. Motion for Restraining Order

5. Motion to Increase Child Support and Clarify Payment Date

6. Motion for Citation for Contempt and for Damages

7. Verified Motion for Emergency Restraining Order (needs opinion letter from psychologist attached)

8. Interrogatories

9. NOT ENCLOSED. Your lawyer needs to prepare a Notice of Taking Depositions, supported by subpoenae and subpoenae duces tecum. Depositions need to be taken of Stanley Leon Garfield and Patricia Hill-Garfield, as well as of the employers of both of these persons. Subpoenae duces tecum need to be served on both employers to bring all records of pay, commissions earned or paid, benefits, pension plans and medical plans, hours worked and bonuses paid for the past three years to the date of the deposition.

I have included drafts of each of these items except number 8, all of which should be presented to your Texas lawyer for her consideration. If she approves filing some or all of them, she will need to add her signature line, any verification or affidavit, and any certificate of service necessary under Texas civil procedure.

I recommend taking Christopher to a psychologist experienced in family law matters, and perhaps appending a copy of his opinion letter to the motions.

I also suggest you run drivers license checks (getting certified copies of the driving records) of both Stanley and Patricia, as well as police checks if that can be accomplished in Houston. Then, if the records checks turn up anything, you may file a "Motion for Injunction to Prevent Christopher from Riding in Vehicle With Twice-Convicted Drunk Driver" or something similar, supporting your motion with a copy of the conviction.

I am certainly available to confer with your Texas attorney if you or she wishes.

Meanwhile, I send kindest regards.


Yours sincerely,



Maurice Franks





IN THE 246th JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS

Civil Action Number 90-123456

IN THE MATTER OF
THE MARRIAGE OF

STANLEY LEON GARFIELD
AND
CAROL PAULSEN GARFIELD

AND IN THE INTEREST OF
CHRISTOPHER QUIMET GARFIELD,
MINOR CHILD

MOTION TO MODIFY AND TERMINATE JOINT MANAGING CONSERVATORSHIP AND TO RESTRICT AND SUPERVISE POSSESSORY CONSERVATORSHIP

Comes now Carol Paulsen Garfield, respondent, and moves to modify and terminate the joint managing conservatorship of Christopher Quimet Garfield established by this honorable court's decree of 5 June 1991, and to award sole managing conservatorship to respondent, Carol Garfield Paulsen, and to restrict petitioner's exercise of possessory conservatorship and require all possession by him to be supervised, for the following reasons:

1. Joint managing conservatorship is in the best interests of the child only when the parties cooperate. Petitioner has already been convicted of contempt of this honorable court for failure to disclose his telephone number to respondent.

2. Since entry of this court's decree on 5 June 1991, additional events have occurred. Following the divorce, petitioner for nearly two years established a regular pattern of visitation with the child. The child came to look forward to the regular visits with his father. Then in December 1992 the father remarried a thrice-divorced woman. Following the remarriage, the child has been subjected to repeated and traumatic rejection, as follows:

(a) Following the father's remarriage in February 1993, the father broke off almost all contact with Christopher. The father's new wife has a son by one of her three prior marriages, which son is named Matthew Hill. Matthew apparently has replaced Christopher in his father's affections.

(b) Christopher's father had planned a birthday party for him, and had promised that there would be presents and that other children would be there. On 24 October 1993, Christopher went to his father's residence with high expectations. When he arrived, he learned that his father and his present wife had been arguing all weekend. Christopher's stepmother did not even say hello. There was no birthday party, no other children, no cake. The only present was a "creepy-crawler maker," and Christopher was not even allowed to take that home with him. On his birthday, Christopher actually heard his stepmother say that if his dad brought him over again, she would divorce him! Christopher left his "birthday party" early, broken hearted.

(c) The father now schedules visits but then stands the child up and fails to show. Christopher has become oppositional and his grades have deteriorated.

(d) Christopher now refers to his stepmother as "Miss Meanie."

(e) The father has violated the requirements of page 6, paragraph 3 of the addendum to the decree, requiring each conservator to return with the child the personal effects of the child. On two consecutive summers, the mother sent the child's bicycle with Christopher on his extended summer visitation. On two consecutive summers, the father has refused to return Christopher's bicycle. Little Matthew, Christopher's step-sibling by his father's remarriage, now has both bicycles and Christopher has none.

(f) The father has likewise failed to return six shirts, six pairs of jeans, two pairs of tennis shoes, one coat, swimsuits, underwear and togs, all property of Christopher now converted and turned over to Matthew. Christopher has now outgrown most of these items, new at the time of their purchase. The clothes are of a value of $700, which now need to be replaced with new clothes.

(g) The father has likewise failed to return Christopher's furniture and has converted same and turned it over to Matthew. The furniture consists of a twin bed and mattress, dresser with hutch, night table, table lamp, set of shelves, toy box, sheets, quilt, pillows and bedspread, all of a value of $1,200. The said items have now been subjected to wear, tear and abuse at the hands of Matthew, and now need to be replaced with new items.

3. The circumstances of the child and his joint-custodian father have materially and substantially changed since entry of this honorable court's order on 5 June 1991 within the meaning of Texas Family Code § 14.08 and within the doctrine of Randle v. Randle, 700 S.W.2d 314 (App 1st Dist. 1985). The retention of the father, Stanley Leon Garfield, as a joint managing conservator would be injurious to the welfare of the child, and the appointment of Carol Paulsen Garfield as sole managing conservator would be a positive improvement for the child. The prior order has become unworkable under the existing circumstances, and the father has voluntarily relinquished the actual care, control and possession of the child for more than six months.

4. There has been no contact between the child and his father since the abusive visit of 24 October 1993. The child's present environment during his now-sporadic and inconsistent visits to his father significantly impairs his emotional development. The child is forced to hear his stepmother rant that he is unwanted and unwelcome in their home, to hear her threaten divorce if he ever returns, to live with the guilt of being the "cause" of his father's next impending divorce, all the while witnessing his two bicycles, his toys, his clothing and his furniture having been converted to the use of another child, all with his father's acquiescence and approval.

WHEREFORE, respondent, Carol Paulsen Garfield, moves and prays that joint managing conservatorship be terminated, that the father be given possessory conservatorship to be exercised only under the immediate supervision of a social worker or psychologist to be selected by the court, that the costs of all supervision be paid by petitioner, and that petitioner be restrained and enjoined from subjecting Christopher to the presence of his new wife, Patricia Hill-Garfield, or to the presence of her child Matthew, or suffering either of them to be within the same building or vehicle, or within earshot or view of the place where Christopher is at the time.





_________________________________________
SUSAN JONES, Attorney for Respondent
Bar Registration 382265
6150 West Loop South, Suite 1000
Houston, Texas 77028
Telephone (713) 555-1212





VERIFICATION AND AFFIDAVIT

STATE OF TEXAS

County of Harris

Before me, the undersigned authority, a Notary Public in and for the State of Texas, County of Harris, personally came and appeared Carol Paulsen Garfield, who, being first duly sworn upon oath, deposed and said that all allegations of fact contained in the above and foregoing instrument are true to the best of her knowledge, information and belief.





_________________________________________
CAROL PAULSEN GARFIELD, Respondent



Subscribed and sworn to before me, this ______ day of _______________, 199___, at Houston, Texas.

My commission expires: ____________________________.





_________________________________________
NOTARY PUBLIC







IN THE 246th JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS

Civil Action Number 90-123456

IN THE MATTER OF
THE MARRIAGE OF

STANLEY LEON GARFIELD
AND
CAROL PAULSEN GARFIELD

AND IN THE INTEREST OF
CHRISTOPHER QUIMET GARFIELD,
MINOR CHILD

MOTION FOR MENTAL EXAMINATION, TREATMENT AND COSTS

1. Comes now Carol Paulsen Garfield, respondent, and moves for an order directing Stanley Leon Garfield and his present wife, Patricia Hill-Garfield, to submit to mental examination, and to require them to undergo whatever plan of therapy or treatment may be determined necessary to enable her son, Christopher Quimet Garfield, to exercise visits with his father without being psychologically traumatized, all at the expense of petitioner.

2. Respondent further states that her son, Christopher, has been damaged and traumatized by being subjected to emotional abuse, as follows:

(a) Following the father's remarriage in February 1993, the father broke off almost all contact with Christopher. The father's new wife has a son by one of her three prior marriages, which son is named Matthew Hill. Matthew apparently has replaced Christopher in his father's affections.

(b) Christopher's father had planned a birthday party for him, and had promised that there would be presents and that other children would be there. On 24 October 1993, Christopher went to his father's residence with high expectations. When he arrived, he learned that his father and his present wife had been arguing all weekend. Christopher's stepmother did not even say hello. There was no birthday party, no other children, no cake. The only present was a "creepy-crawler maker," and Christopher was not even allowed to take that home with him. On his birthday, Christopher actually heard his stepmother say that if his dad brought him over again, she would divorce him! Christopher left his "birthday party" early, broken hearted.

(c) The father now schedules visits but then stands the child up and fails to show. Christopher has become oppositional and his grades have deteriorated.

(d) Christopher now refers to his stepmother as "Miss Meanie."

(e) The father has violated the requirements of page 6, paragraph 3 of the addendum to this honorable court's decree of 5 June 1991, requiring each conservator to return with the child the personal effects of the child. On two consecutive summers, the mother sent the child's bicycle with Christopher on his extended summer visitation. On two consecutive summers, the father has refused to return Christopher's bicycle. Little Matthew, Christopher's step-sibling by his father's remarriage, now has both bicycles and Christopher has none.

(f) The father has likewise failed to return six shirts, six pairs of jeans, two pairs of tennis shoes, one coat, swimsuits, underwear and togs, all property of Christopher now converted and turned over to Matthew. Christopher has now outgrown most of these items, new at the time of their purchase. The clothes are of a value of $700, which the father should be required to replace with new clothes.

(g) The father has likewise failed to return Christopher's furniture and has converted same and turned it over to Matthew. The furniture consists of a twin bed and mattress, dresser with hutch, night table, table lamp, set of shelves, toy box, sheets, quilt, pillows and bedspread, all of a value of $1,200. The said items have now been subjected to wear, tear and abuse at the hands of Matthew, and should be replaced with new items.

(h) The child is forced to hear his stepmother rant that he is unwanted and unwelcome in their home, to hear her threaten divorce if he ever returns, to live with the guilt of being the "cause" of his father's next impending divorce, while witnessing his only two bicycles, his clothing and his furniture all having been converted to the use of another child, all with his father's acquiescence and approval.

3. As a direct result of the traumatization of the child, the child has become oppositional and his grades have deteriorated. The child requires therapy to correct these problems and further to enable him to cope with the vacillating and inconsistent behavior of his father and the rejection of his step-mother.

WHEREFORE, respondent moves and prays for an order directing Stanley Leon Garfield and his present wife, Patricia Hill-Garfield, to submit to mental examination, and to require them to undergo whatever plan of therapy or treatment may be determined necessary to enable her son, Christopher Quimet Garfield, to exercise visits with his father without being psychologically traumatized, all at the expense of petitioner.

Respondent further moves and prays for an order directing petitioner, Stanley Leon Garfield, to pay for a course of therapy for the child, Christopher Quimet Garfield, to correct the emotional problems resulting from his father's behaviors and further to enable him to cope with the vacillating and inconsistent behavior of his father and the rejection of his step-mother.





_________________________________________
SUSAN JONES, Attorney for Respondent
Bar Registration 382265
6150 West Loop South, Suite 1000
Houston, Texas 77028
Telephone (713) 555-1212



VERIFICATION AND AFFIDAVIT

STATE OF TEXAS

County of Harris

Before me, the undersigned authority, a Notary Public in and for the State of Texas, County of Harris, personally came and appeared Carol Paulsen Garfield, who, being first duly sworn upon oath, deposed and said that all allegations of fact contained in the above and foregoing instrument are true to the best of her knowledge, information and belief.





_________________________________________
CAROL PAULSEN GARFIELD, Respondent



Subscribed and sworn to before me, this ______ day of _______________, 199___, at Houston, Texas.

My commission expires: ____________________________.





_________________________________________
NOTARY PUBLIC







IN THE 246th JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS

Civil Action Number 90-123456

IN THE MATTER OF
THE MARRIAGE OF

STANLEY LEON GARFIELD
AND
CAROL PAULSEN GARFIELD

AND IN THE INTEREST OF
CHRISTOPHER QUIMET GARFIELD,
MINOR CHILD

MOTION FOR RESTRAINING ORDER

Comes now Carol Paulsen Garfield, respondent, and moves this honorable court for a restraining order and an injunction restraining and enjoining Stanley Leon Garfield from harassing or disturbing the peace of movant or her minor child, Christopher Quimet Garfield, in any place, or from coming about movant's place of employment or her and the child's residence. In support of this motion, movant says that in the past her former husband, Stanley Leon Garfield, physically abused and brutalized her during the marriage, including punches to her face leaving facial injuries and bruises. This occurred on when movant discovered cocaine hidden in the house and destroyed same. Movent states that her former husband is a violent and dangerous man, and that she fears that her husband upon being served with the motions being filed this day will again lose control and become violent.

WHEREFORE, movant, Carol Paulsen Garfield, moves and prays for a restraining order restraining and enjoining Stanley Leon Garfield from harassing or disturbing the peace of movant or her minor child, Christopher Quimet Garfield, in any place, or from coming about movant's place of employment or her and the child's residence.





_________________________________________
SUSAN JONES, Attorney for Respondent
Bar Registration 382265
6150 West Loop South, Suite 1000
Houston, Texas 77028
Telephone (713) 555-1212



VERIFICATION AND AFFIDAVIT

STATE OF TEXAS

County of Harris

Before me, the undersigned authority, a Notary Public in and for the State of Texas, County of Harris, personally came and appeared Carol Paulsen Garfield, who, being first duly sworn upon oath, deposed and said that all allegations of fact contained in the above and foregoing instrument are true to the best of her knowledge, information and belief.





_________________________________________
CAROL PAULSEN GARFIELD, Respondent



Subscribed and sworn to before me, this ______ day of _______________, 199___, at Houston, Texas.

My commission expires: __________________.





_________________________________________
NOTARY PUBLIC







IN THE 246th JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS

Civil Action Number 90-123456

IN THE MATTER OF
THE MARRIAGE OF

STANLEY LEON GARFIELD
AND
CAROL PAULSEN GARFIELD

AND IN THE INTEREST OF
CHRISTOPHER QUIMET GARFIELD,
MINOR CHILD

MOTION TO INCREASE CHILD SUPPORT AND TO CLARIFY PAYMENT DATE

Comes now Carol Paulsen Garfield, respondent, and moves for an increase in support and for an order expressly stating when support payments shall be made and that payment shall be effective upon receipt and not upon mailing, all for the following reasons:

1. Since entry of the last support orders herein on 5 June 1991, there has been a material change of conditions and circumstances. More particularly:

(a) Stanley Leon Garfield, who claims to have lost his former job, bragged to respondent's mother that he now makes as much money as before, but that the same is in the form of non-traceable commissions.

(b) Stanley Leon Garfield has remarried, and is in fact supporting one Matthew Hill, the child by a prior relationship of his present wife, Patricia Hill-Garfield. In the meanwhile, Patricia Hill-Garfield refuses to pursue the father of Matthew for support. If petitioner is able to support another's child, his net disposable income is sufficient that this honorable court should order that the money now being squandered on another's child instead be expended to the use of his own child, Christopher, all as contemplated by Walton v. Walton, 567 S.W.2d 66 (Civ. App. 1978).

(c) Stanley Leon Garfield has remarried, and his present wife's income is community property available for the support of Christopher. See generally In re Marriage of Brown, 160 Cal. App. 524 (1979).

(d) Stanley Leon Garfield has remarried, and in any case the sharing of living expenses with his present wife has reduced his expenditures and resulted in the increase of his net discretionary income available for the support of his son.

2. Christopher's support payments are chronically tardy by as much as two weeks. Petitioner apparently has permitted his employer to believe that the payment is timely if mailed, rather than received, by the due date. Respondent has no way of verifying the accuracy of the petitioner's employer's postage-meter mailing dates.

WHEREFORE, movant respectfully moves and prays that child support be increased, and that a date be set with specificity for each payment to be made, expressly stating that such payment must be received and not merely be mailed by such date.





_________________________________________
SUSAN JONES, Attorney for Respondent
Bar Registration 382265
6150 West Loop South, Suite 1000
Houston, Texas 77028
Telephone (713) 555-1212



VERIFICATION AND AFFIDAVIT

STATE OF TEXAS

County of Harris

Before me, the undersigned authority, a Notary Public in and for the State of Texas, County of Harris, personally came and appeared Carol Paulsen Garfield, who, being first duly sworn upon oath, deposed and said that all allegations of fact contained in the above and foregoing instrument are true to the best of her knowledge, information and belief.





_________________________________________
CAROL PAULSEN GARFIELD, Respondent



Subscribed and sworn to before me, this ______ day of _______________, 199___, at Houston, Texas.

My commission expires: ____________________________.





_________________________________________
NOTARY PUBLIC





Return to The Castle Classroom


Copyright ©2002 by M. R. Franks - ALL RIGHTS RESERVED