3
our older son since 03/30/17, while a Modification of Custody pending the recommendations of the court-appointed GAL proceeded. a. The Motion for Psychological Evaluation of Mr. Ojeda, filed by my attorney on 05/15/17, was also heard. During the hearing, Mr. Ojeda requested that The Court also order a psychological evaluation of me, even though he did not file a formal motion. The Court granted my motion , as well as Mr. Ojeda’s request that both parties undergo a psychological evaluation, as neither my attorney or I objected to Mr. Ojeda’s request. b. Mr. Ojeda’s Attorney at this time, Michael O’Shea, withdrew from the case. Attorney Chelsea Kay Merta entered the case as Mr. Ojeda’s new legal counsel. Note: From this day forward, the most visitation Mr. Ojeda was granted by the GAL, who was appointed to make recommendations about his custody and visitation while it remained suspended during a year-long custody modification, was two weekly visits held in a public place (usually a restaurant). 11) 04/04/18 - The Parties were scheduled for trial for the Motion to Modify Custody which was ordered to resolve the suspension of Mr. Ojeda’s custody of the minors beginning in The Spring of 2017. On the day of trial, The Parties consented to the GAL’s proposed judgement to The Court. a. The 04/04/18 judgement awarded sole legal and physical custody to me. It provided for Mr. Ojeda to have highly limited visitation which was required to take place in a public place, as it had been during the year-long custody modification. The GAL also recommended other orders restricting Mr. Ojeda’s contact with the children at school, extracurricular activities and by phone. b. There were also orders which limited Mr. Ojeda’s ability to have contact with me. I was awarded $35,000 in attorney’s fees and Mr. Ojeda was ordered to pay child support again, which he had not since February 2017. In addition, Mr. Ojeda was ordered to pay $10,000 in outstanding fees to the GAL. 12) 05/03/18 - My attorney filed a Motion To Reopen Evidence and/or Amendment of The Court’s 04/04/18 Judgement . a. The motion alleged that Mr. Ojeda was in contempt of many of The Court’s Orders related to the minors, as well as orders restricting his contact with me, in a period of less than thirty days since a judgement was entered by The Court.
Made with FlippingBook interactive PDF creator