Australian Father and Mother battle over custody of their three children.

They are in court two days in a row.

The next day, Father allegedly stands on a bridge and throws 4 year old Daughter over the side of it, into a river.

The couple’s other two children may be in the car during the incident.

Daughter dies.

Father is charged with murder. Father faces a possible life sentence if convicted of the charge.

Father is deemed “psychologically unfit” to appear in the initial criminal proceedings.

There likely won’t be much of a battle over custody over the two surviving children, even if Father is not deemed “psychologically unfit” to appear in family court.

Read more in this [Lake Charles, LA] KPLC 7 NBC TV news article: Man charged with daughter’s death plunge involved in custody battle.

New Jersey Husband and Wife divorce. Husband is ordered to pay alimony, as well as child support for Son.

Wife and teenaged Son argue. Wife is angry and drunk.

Wife allegedly beats Son … to death.

Wife is sentenced to three years’ incarceration for Son’s death.

The trial court suspends Husband’s obligation to pay current alimony, but requires Husband to continue payments of arrearages into Wife’s “prison account”.

An appellate court later suspends Husband’s obligation to make payments on the arrearages, deferring payments of arrearages until Wife’s release from confinement.

The appeals court cannot not find any legal authority authorizing it to terminate Husband’s alimony obligation because of Son’s death.

But the Court invites the state legislature to address the issue by statute.

And address it the legislature eventually does.

A new New Jersey bill terminates alimony to a parent who kills a child intentionally or through abandonment or neglect.

The bill also cuts off a parent’s right of inheritance from a child the parent abandoned, abused, neglected, or endangered.

Read more in this North Jersey Crime Examiner article: No alimony for parent who kills child, panel recommends.

A Wisconsin Father recently won an appeal to the state’s intermediate level appellate court. His victory saved him from having to pay out nearly $4,000 in legal fees.

The case is somewhat noteworthy because the Father represented himself, without an attorney.

The case is much more noteworthy because the musician-Father composed his legal brief all in rap lyrics.

The ruling appellate court made no mention of that fact, but the Father is convinced that this form of expression played a significant role in his prevailing.

The Father had filed a federal court case against county officials who had recommended that his timesharing with his children be less than his former wife’s. This type of matter is not appropriate for a federal court.

Ironically, the Father may now seek costs from the party who sought but was ultimately denied fees from him.

While the case is probably not likely to set a new standard in legal drafting using rap anytime in the near future ….

Read more in this MSNBC TV article: Man Writes Rap for Legal Dispute.

It sounds as though Peoria is discovering the benefits of mediation in appropriate cases.

Although very common in the context of divorce, most divorcing parties are unaware of mediation or unclear as to what it is.

Mediation is not trial or arbitration. The mediator does not decide all or part of a case and cannot tell parties what to do.

A mediator is a neutral third party, a facilitator in regard to the issues in dispute between the parties.

As helpful as it can be in resolving cases, mediation is not appropriate where there is a history of domestic violence by one party, and may not be appropriate where there is a history of drug abuse by one party, one party is very controlling and manipulative, one party has all the economic power in the relationship, etc.

Mediation is becoming increasingly popular, even mandatory, in many types of family cases.

Mediation is not an all-or-nothing proposition. Some issues can be resolved in a case even if others cannot.

Long, contentious mediations, however, can be as costly as many trials are.

Read more in this Peoria [IL] Journal Star article: When custody disputes get dicey, a third party often mediates the split.

Canadian billionaire Father cohabits with much younger immigrant woman, Mother, for 10 years.

They have three children together.

They are not married.

Father pays $35,000 Canadian per month in child support.

Mother wants more.

Challenging Quebec province and other Canadian law that denies property division and alimony to common law partners or mere cohabitants, Mother sues for both.

Florida law also generally precludes a cohabitant from claiming an interest in the other partner’s property or seeking alimony or support other than for children in common.

This case has generated a lot of media attention in Canada.

Read more in this Montreal CJAD NewsTalk Radio article: Quebec multi-millionaire mystery man testifies in alimony case.

Husband and Wife are from Utah.

Husband has been in the military, stationed in California, for some time now.

The parties divorced while Husband was stationed in California and the divorce was entered in California.

Wife returned with their child to live in Utah.

Husband seeks to have the amount of child support he must pay revisited in a Utah court, where the amount of child support would likely be lower.

But the Utah courts refuse to hear the case, holding that California has jurisdiction because Husband is still stationed there.

Husband is seeking a new hearing on the jurisdiction issue, and two branches of the service will be putting their two cents in.

It isn’t clear whether Utah would have taken jurisdiction of their divorce had it been filed there in the first place and, if so, why the divorce wasn’t filed there.

Utah’s rulling seems to run contrary to the spirit of federal law and contrary to the law in at least some US states.

And, under all the facts of this particular case, simply unfair.

Florida, for example, recognizes Floridians who are stationed elsewhere in the military as Florida residents, and will exercise jurisdiction over their divorces.

But that does not preclude the place where they are stationed from exercising jurisdiction.

Read more in this Salt Lake Tribune article: Marine from Utah can’t take divorce case home.

California Husband and Wife have a 4 year old Daughter together.

Husband and Wife divorce.

Wife is a US Navy Seabee.

Visitation exchanges are nasty.

An audio recording reveals Wife insisting that Husband’s car seat is not installed properly.

… And denying that she tried to have Husband murdered.

Wife calls the police about the car seat.

Poor Daughter can be heard asking “I am not seeing my dad?”

Wife drives away with Daughter.

Husband is murdered outside his home.

Wife tells authorities that Husband drinks and plays pool and doesn’t allow her any friends.

Wife also tells police that Husband is involved with motorcycle clubs and a criminal street gang.

Police find no evidence to support Wife’s accusations.

Wife and a fellow Seabee are charged with Husband’s murder, and are being tried together.

Another Seabee is charged in the murder as well, but will have a separate trial.

Yet another Seabee is charged with attempted murder for an earlier attempt on Husband’s life.

Read more in this Ventura County [CA] Star article: Jury in Seabee slaying case hears taped argument.

Chinese Father. Israeli Mother. Son appears to be American. And home was United States.

Until Mother takes Son to Israel. And stays there. For three years.

Mother’s version of events:
Father raped her, and Son is the product of that rape. Father authorized passport and was aware of her plan to travel to Israel with Son.

2006 Court order under the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction:
Son is to be returned to Father in the US.

Court order is found on Mother. Yet Mother claims not to have known about hearing.

Ironically, Mother is “caught” during a routine check having nothing to do with Son’s “missing” status.

Mother is arrested. Son is taken into protective custody.

Read more in this Israel Haaretz article: Woman stopped in routine check, held for ‘kidnapping’ child from U.S. dad.

A couple’s finances can sometimes get pretty complicated during divorce.

Take an Indianapolis couple as an example.

Husband and Wife operate an investment company together.

Presumably anticipating Wife filing for divorce the next day, Husband and his reported girlfriend, board his private plane, bound for Florida. This is captured on airport video surveillance.

Then law enforcement enters Husband’s and Wife’s home, seizing computers and money, and freezing the married couple’s assets. Husband allegedly has defrauded customers out of millions of their dollars.

Husband returns to Indiana. Then Husband boards his private plane again, once more bound for Florida and, reportedly, his girlfriend.

But Husband signals distress and bails out of the plane before landing. It seems Husband wants authorities – and Wife – to give him up for dead.

But instead Husband is found – and is now in jail, on Federal charges – with state charges to follow.

It is unclear whether Wife ever participated in Husband’s alleged fraud.

What is the marital property? Marital debts? How shall they be divided between the Husband and Wife?

Gets pretty complicated indeed ….

Read more in this MSNBC / WTHR TV article: Video shows Schrenker preparing for flight.

Husband and Wife split up. Battle over custody of their 2 year old Daughter ensues.

Husband is awarded temporary primary residential custody of Daughter.

Husband’s 91 year old Grandmother owns a house.

Wife and Wife’s mother are in Grandmother’s house when Husband arrives to check on Grandmother.

Wife’s mother clubs Husband on the head with a baton, and Wife brandishes a gun at him.

Wife informs Husband that she is taking custody of their daughter. Wife shoots Husband with a stun gun.

Police find Grandmother’s body in a trash bin in the garage at the house.

Possibly the only one not physically injured at the house is Daughter. She is taken into child protective custody.

Wife, Wife’s mother and Wife’s mother’s husband (found in a nearby car) are all arrested on suspicion of murder, attempted murder and conspiracy.

Read more in this San Francisco Chronicle article: 3 suspects arrested in slaying of woman, 91.