When it comes to child custody, as a parent you need to be proactive in asserting your legal rights. Even if a court awards you custody or visitation rights, you still need to take affirmative steps to exercise those rights–or take appropriate legal action if the other parent is undermining the judge’s order. Simply waiting around and hoping the situation will resolve itself is never a good option. For one thing, inaction may lead a court to conclude it is in your child’s best interest to alter a prior order regarding custody and visitation rights.

Court of Special Appeals Rules for Mother in Cross-Border Custody Dispute

A recent unreported opinion from the Maryland Court of Appeals, Blackman v. Davis, provides a cautionary example. This case involved the unmarried parents of a minor daughter. The parents originally lived together with the child in Maryland. But the parents separated in 2018 and the mother relocated with the child to Mexico.

Shortly before the mother’s move, the father filed a petition in Maryland Circuit Court seeking custody of the daughter. The mother never replied to or defended against the lawsuit. As such, the Circuit Court entered default judgment for the father and, based on a recommendation from a Family Magistrate, awarded the parents joint legal and shared physical custody of their daughter.

But for the next year, the father apparently took no action to enforce the court order. After a year had passed, the father did meet with the mother and daughter in Texas. Although the father spoke with local law enforcement in Texas, he specifically asked them “not to contact” the mother about the Maryland custody order, according to court records.

The mother said she only learned about the custody order after speaking with the police in Texas. She then filed a motion in the Circuit Court to vacate the order, alleging there had been a material change in circumstances. The judge agreed that, largely due to the father’s inaction, it was now in the best interests of the daughter to award the mother sole custody, with the father receiving only limited visitation rights.

The Court of Special Appeals affirmed the judge’s ruling. It noted that the father “made no attempts to obtain custody,” despite the prior court order, thus “effectively relinquishing custody to the mother.” The father argued he felt it would be impossible to enforce his parental rights without filing a separate lawsuit in the Mexican courts, but the Court of Special Appeals noted he could have filed a petition in Maryland, which still had jurisdiction under international law.

The appellate court further explained the trial court properly weighed the necessary legal factors in awarding sole custody to the mother, notably considerations of “potential disruption to the child’s social and school life,” as well as the father’s apparent unwillingness to actually be a full-time parent.

Contact Landover, Maryland, Family Law Attorney Robert Castro Today

This article has been provided by the Law Office of Robert Castro. For more information or questions contact our office to speak to an experienced lawyer at (301) 870-1200.

Source:

https://www.courts.state.md.us/sites/default/files/unreported-opinions/0138s21_0.pdf