Difference between revisions of "Faux Process And Rubber-Stamped Orders"

In 2019, I represented a mother in Muskogee County fighting for custody of her 5-year-old son. The mother had primary custody at the time and an intermittent hearing was held to potentially appoint a Guardian Ad Litem to the case. That hearing was not regarding the change of custody and the Muskogee County Superior Court did not change custody that day. the judge asked the father’s attorney to draft an order appointing the Guardian Ad Litem to the case. The opposing counsel drafted the “proposed” order for the judge to review. In the proposed order, however, the opposing attorney inserted a clause that changed full custody from the mother to the father. The judge signed the order without scrutiny and, without notice or a hearing on the matter, the mother lost full custody of her son. It took over a year and a judge's recusal for the mother to regain primary custody of her son.

In 2019, I represented a mother in Muskogee County fighting for custody of her 5-year-old son. The mother had primary custody at the time and an intermittent hearing was held to potentially appoint a Guardian Ad Litem to the case. That hearing was not regarding the change of custody and the Muskogee County Superior Court did not change custody that day. the judge asked the father’s attorney to draft an order appointing the Guardian Ad Litem to the case. The opposing counsel drafted the “proposed” order for the judge to review. In the proposed order, however, the opposing attorney inserted a clause that changed full custody from the mother to the father. The judge signed the order without scrutiny and, without notice or a hearing on the matter, the mother lost full custody of her son. It took over a year and a judge's recusal for the mother to regain primary custody of her son.