by Rachel Elovitz

Dear Barrister:
A client of mine (we’ll call him Ital E. Bound) is hoping to take his two children, eight and 10 years old, to Hawaii and Italy this summer. His ex-wife has indicated that she will not sign a travel consent form.

My client’s Settlement Agreement (which was incorporated last October into a Final Judgment and Decree of Divorce) provides that he is the children’s “primary” physical custodian. His ex-wife was designated the children’s “secondary” physical custodian. They are joint legal custodians (i.e., they are required to consult in good faith when making decisions about the children’s education, medical care and treatment, religious upbringing, and extracurricular activities). My client, however, has ultimate decision-making authority on all matters of legal custody in the event of a stalemate. Given these facts, is it really necessary for him to obtain his ex-wife’s consent to take the children to Hawaii and Italy?

by Rachel A. Elovitz

Dear Barrister:

I am recently remarried, and my home is now complete – with a wonderful wife, five children, three dogs, two cats, and a snake. Our combined families function as one. The children treat each other like children typically do. They compete, bicker, fight, make up, play, laugh and cry – and they are truly best friends. My three daughters call their stepmother “Mom” and have (on multiple occasions) pleaded with her to adopt them.

By Rachel Elovitz

Dear Barrister:

One Sunday morning, a young woman came to my church with her six young sons. They exited the vehicle and began walking toward the church. The youngest son, who appeared to be almost three, let go of his mother’s hand and ran back toward the car, shouting that he had forgotten “Mr. Rabbit,” a stuffed animal that he carries everywhere. The neighbor who drove the family to the church had already started to back up and the child was hit.

The paramedics arrived, and while the EMTs did not see anything that suggested the child had sustained any injuries, the mother insisted that they take him, so that he could be checked by a physician. At the hospital, the medical personnel discovered that the child had suffered some minor internal injuries, but after a couple of days, he was returned to his mother. She was subsequently arrested for cruelty to children in the second degree, among other charges. That was about 23 months ago.

The mother has not yet been arraigned, and I’m not certain whether she has been formally accused or indicted. She is unemployed, lives in government housing, and does not have the funds necessary to hire a lawyer. And since she has not yet gone to court, she has not had a chance to ask for a court-appointed lawyer.

I recall something about a defendant being entitled to a speedy trial. When does that occur – and at what point is this mother allowed a court-appointed attorney?

Sincerely,
Retired in Roanoke

By Rachel Elovitz

Dear Barrister:

A dear friend recently called me, frantic. Her 15-year-old daughter, who I’ll call Virginia, had been strip searched by the school principal. He suspected that Virginia was selling her mother’s oxycodone pills to other students. His “suspicion” was supposedly based on the report of another student. When the principal’s “pat down” did not produce anything, he told Virginia to remove her top. He then asked his secretary to search Virginia’s bra – and when that did not produce anything, he asked Virginia to remove her pants. He had his secretary check around Virginia’s underwear. There were no drugs.

Dear Barrister:

I had a dream last night; actually it was more of a nightmare. I observed a heated courtroom exchange between an attorney and a judge.

The attorney objected to statements made by opposing counsel during opening arguments. During the course of his objection, he suggested as fact that which the court knew was tenuous at best. The judge chided the lawyer rather sternly, reminding the attorney that he was not new to the bench, had reached adulthood many decades earlier, and was nobody’s fool. He suggested that the attorney not waste the court’s time or taxpayer dollars with time-wasting shenanigans. The attorney nodded, as if he understood, and then repeated that for which the Court had just rebuked him.

Dear Barrister:
I have a client, a grandmother, who has been denied access to her grandchildren by her daughter-in-law. The children’s father is serving time outside the state for tax evasion. The children have not seen him in seven years. During that time, until about six months ago, they were spending every other week with their grandmother. My client wants to file a petition for visitation. OCGA § 19-7-3 requires her to prove that the grandchildren would be harmed if the visitation is not granted (and that their best interests will be served by the visitation). How on earth does one prove a hypothetical?

Sincerely,
Dispirited in DeKalb