Published on:

We understand that parents are facing challenging times in the midst of this COVID-19 pandemic. When one parent is an essential employee, it is especially concerning for co-parents when children transition from one parent’s home to the other for court-ordered parenting time. National news stories are filled with children and parents greeting each other through glass doors and windows. Those front-line, essential-employee parents recognize that in-person contact with their children during this COVID-19 pandemic is not in the best interest of the health and safety of their children.  New Battle for those on Coronavirus Front Lines: Child Custody .  Closer to home, the White House has now officially designated the Baltimore / Washington, D.C. area as an emerging COVID-19 hotspot. Baltimore/Washington DC Emerging Hot Spot.

Published on:
Updated:
Published on:

Another unfortunate consequence of COVID-19 is the postponement of the pendente lite hearings, settlement conferences and merit trials which were actually scheduled on the court docket months ago, but are not going forward as planned due to the court closures. Thus far, my experience has been that the courts are working hard to get the postponed cases reset as quickly as possible. Unfortunately, I have already had several client matters get reset only to be postponed and reset yet again as a result of the Administrative Order to extend the court closures. As a litigant, this can be extremely frustrating especially when the access to/custody of your children and finances remain uncertain.

Published on:
Updated:
Published on:

The short answer is yes, if your situation meets the statutory requirements for a protective order, peace order or extreme risk protective order, you may still obtain an interim order of protection. Pursuant to the Maryland Court of Appeals Chef Judge Administrative Order issued March 25, 2020, all petitions for new protective orders, peace orders, and extreme risk protective orders are to be handled by the District Court Commissioners’ office in the County/City where you would normally file. If granted by the Commissioner, the Interim Order will remain in place until further action is taken by the Court. As of now (April 7, 2020), the temporary hearings are being set for May 4 and 5, 2020 which may be subject to change, if the Administrative Order is modified.

Published on:
Updated:
Published on:

Oftentimes, parents with the best intentions disagree on how to manage the health, safety, and medical issues of their children. Throw in a pandemic and navigating custody and access becomes even more of a challenge with COVID-19 CDC recommendations and government-imposed restrictions. As a practitioner, this is a first, and we are all seeking some guidance from the judiciary to help us support and advise our clients on these issues. The Maryland Judiciary has put out the following statement on matters concerning children and families.

Published on:
Updated:
Published on:

A Custody Evaluator is appointed by a Court pursuant to Maryland Rule 9-205.3.  Pursuant to the Maryland Rule there are mandatory elements of a Custody Evaluation as set forth in 9-205.3(f)(1) and optional elements as set forth in 9-205.3(f)(2).  Mandatory elements, subject to any protective order of the court, a custody evaluation shall include: (A) a review of the relevant court records pertaining to the litigation; (B) an interview with each party; (C) an interview of the child, unless the custody evaluator determines and explains that by reason of age, disability, or lack of maturity, the child lacks capacity to be interviewed; (D) a review of any relevant educational, medical, and legal records pertaining to the child; (E) if feasible, observations of the child with each party, whenever possible in that party’s household; (F) factual findings about the needs of the child and the capacity of each party to meet the child’s needs; and (G) a custody and visitation recommendation based upon an analysis of the facts found or, if such a recommendation cannot be made, an explanation of why. Optional elements include, subject to subsection (f)(3) of this Rule, at the discretion of the custody evaluator, a custody evaluation also may include: (A) contact with collateral sources of information; (B) a review of additional records; (C) employment verification; (D) an interview with any other individual residing in the household; (E) a mental health evaluation; (F) consultation with other experts to develop information that is beyond the scope of the evaluator’s practice or area of expertise; and (G) an investigation into any other relevant information about the child’s needs. Maryland Rule 9-205.3(f)(1)(G) specifically provides the custody evaluator is to provide “a custody and visitation recommendation based upon an analysis of the facts found or, if such a recommendations cannot be made, an explanation of why”.

Published on:
Updated:
Published on:

The U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, Part 838.103 provides “Self-only annuity means the recurring unreduced payments under CSRS or FERS to a retiree with no survivor annuity payable to anyone. Self-only annuity also includes the recurring unreduced phased retirement annuity payments under CSRS or FERS to a phased retiree before any other deduction. Unless the court order expressly provides otherwise, self-only annuity also includes any lump-sum payments made to the retiree under 5 U.S.C. 8343a or 8420a.” While the Gross annuity “means the amount of monthly annuity payable to a retiree or phased retiree after reducing the self-only annuity to provide survivor annuity benefits, if any, but before any other deduction. Unless the court order expressly provides otherwise, gross annuity also includes any lump-sum payments made to the retiree under 5 U.S.C. 8343a or 8420a”.  The Office of Personnel Management (OPM) will apply the martial share formula to the gross annuity UNLESS the Order states otherwise, see U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, Part 838.306 (b) which states “the standard types of annuity to which OPM can apply the formula, percentage, or fraction are phased retirement annuity of a phased retiree, or net annuity, gross annuity, or self-only annuity of a retiree. Unless the court order otherwise directs, OPM will apply to gross annuity the formula, percentage, or fraction directed at annuity payable to either a retiree or a phased retiree.”  Gross Annuity is the default.

Published on:
Updated:
Published on:

A bill was approved by the Maryland House repealing the language of a Maryland Family Law Statute which prohibits decisions in domestic violence proceedings from being admitted into evidence during divorce trials. Current law states that courts cannot consider decisions or orders made in Protective Order proceedings during the divorce trial. Final Protective Orders may be granted after a domestic violence incident and can provide for temporary custody, visitation and use and possession of the marital home. The bill will have to be approved by the Senate and Governor before becoming law.

 

Published on:
Updated:
Published on:

Sen. Wayne Norman (R-Harford) has introduced SB 499, a bill that would allow a circuit court to grant an absolute divorce on the basis of mutual consent, with only one of the parties appearing in court. The bill deletes Fam. Law Sec. 7-103(a)(8)(iv), which currently requires both parties to appear before a chancellor when they are seeking an absolute divorce. The bill hearing is set for February 14, 2017 in the Senate Judicial Proceedings Committee.

Published on:
Updated:
Published on:

Stating three words, Talaq, Talaq, Talaq, is all that is required for a husband to divorce his wife under Islamic law. This ancient tradition is being reviewed by the Supreme Court in India in order to determine the constitutionality of this divorce practice. Other primarily Muslim countries have outlawed this practice of divorce years ago as women are often treated unfairly. This practice continues to effect marriage and divorce in the United States and particularly in Maryland.  Spouses who were married under the Islamic faith do not always realize that if they reside in Maryland, they are still bound by Maryland law and have to initiate the divorce process in the Maryland Courts. Many husbands state the triple Talaq or have a proxy in their home country stand in for them to perform the divorce practice pursuant to the laws of their home country. While they may be divorced in the eyes of their faith, they are not divorced pursuant to the law of Maryland. Maryland case law, Aleem v. Aleem, 404 Md. 404 (2008) has concluded that the Talaq violates due process and public policy and therefore is not recognized as a valid divorce in Maryland.

Published on:
Updated:
Published on:

On November 30, 2012 we blogged about the Attorney General’s Opinion on the issuance of same sex marriage licenses and when the clerks could issue same. It appears that the clerks have followed the guidance of his Opinion as the first licenses were issued Thursday, December 6, 2012 as reported by the Baltimore Sun. Although the couples will not be able to wed until January 1, 2013, the Clerks of most Courts around the State have issued the licenses as of Thursday. As reported, Harford County and Prince Georges County are still working out some logistics, but will soon offer the licenses to same sex couples as well. While January 1, 2013, is a holiday and most courthouses would normally be closed, some are now considering opening to allow the couples to wed on their first available day to do so.
Continue reading →

Published on:
Updated:
Contact Information