Call Today

(877) 276-3870 (toll free)
(804) 897-3950


10710 Midlothian Turnpike
Suite 304
Richmond, VA 23235
info@buccidix.com

Practice Areas

B&D Blog

Divorce

view all

Child Custody

view all

Automobile, Truck & Motorcycle Accidents

view all

Slip and Fall, Falling Merchandise, Premises Liability

view all

Labor & Employment, Civil Rights and Discrimination

view all

Personal Injury

view all

Evidence

view all

Richmond Area News

view all

Courts

view all

General

view all

Frequent Questions

Divorce

Child Custody

Automobile, Truck & Motorcycle Accidents

Labor & Employment, Civil Rights and Discrimination

Lawsuits

Discovery

Trial and Settlement

General

view all

Latest News

view all

Blog Category:

Child Custody

5/31/2010
Hunter W. Jamerson
Comments (0)

Material Change in Circumstance Standard

The threshold standard for courts to consider a change in a custody or visitation order is the material change in circumstance standard.  The Virginia Court of Appeals recently highlighted this standard in Duva v. Duva.  In this matter, the court examined a situation where Father was granted only supervised visitation of the parties' minor children.  Father, disfavoring this ruling, sought a modification to allow him unsupervised visitation.  Father's justification for this change apparently hung on Mother's failure to comply with an oral agreement to take the parties' minor children to frequent counseling sessions, though this obligation was never set forth in a court order.  The court denied Father's request, noting that nothing material had changed since the court last examined the issue of custody.  In Virginia, the standard for a custody/visitation change is (1) whether there has been a change in circumstances since the most recent [visitation] award; and (2) whether a change in [visitation] would be in the best interests of the child. In Duva, Father's claim did not meet the standard for a change in circumstances. 

Labels: child custody
12/17/2009
Jamie N. Sasser
Comments (0)

International Child Custody Ruling

A panel of Brazilian judges ruled that a boy, taken from the United States by his mother in 2004, must be returned to his American father.  The boy's mother took him to Brazil in 2004 for what was supposed to have been a 2 week vacation.  However, she later obtained a Brazilian divorce and remarried.  The boy's father has been seeking his son's return under an international treaty covering child abductions.  Both Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and President Barak Obama have called for the child's return, and the case has made headlines for international child custody disputes. 

11/24/2009
M. Scott Bucci
Comments (0)

Father's Parental Rights Terminated For Failing To Protect Daughter From Sibling

Parental rights terminated for failing to protect daughter from sibling.

Labels: child custody
10/31/2009
Hunter W. Jamerson
Comments (0)

Henrico Circuit Court's Order for Visitation Upheld In Case of Non-Biological Parent

The Virginia Court of Appeals recently affirmed a Circuit Court's decision to hold jurisdiction over a non-biological parent's petition for child custody and visitation.  In the case of O'Rourke v. Vuturo, the Virginia Court of Appeals, sitting in Richmond, heard an appeal from the Henrico Circuit Court.  Vuturo was listed as the child's father on the birth certificate.  The child, however,  while born during the marriage of Vuturo and his wife (now remarried and going by the name O'Rourke), was in fact the biological child of Mr. O'Rourke.  While Vutro was away, his wife took the child to Maryland and moved in with O'Rourke.  The Vuturos subsequently divorced and Mr. Vuturo sought visitation. 

Under Virginia Code 20-146.12, Virginia Courts only have jurisdiction in custody issues if the child lives in the Commonwealth at the commencement of the proceeding or else lived in the Commonwealth within six months of the commencement with a parent or person acting as a parent continuing to live in the Commonwealth.  In this case, the Henrico Circuit Court held jurisdiction over the matter because the child lived with Vuturo within 6 months of commencement of the action and Vuturo was a person acting as a parent as defined in Virginia Code 20-146.1.  Vuturo developed a positive relationship with the child and a parent-child relationship developed.  In fact, the Court saw no evidence that granting Vuturo visitation would result in actual harm to the child. 

10/21/2009
Mark D. Dix
Comments (0)

Ex-Husband Forced to Pay for Childcare Rather than Provide it Himself

In Kappeler v. Kappeler, the Virginia Court of Appeals ordered a father to pay additional child support for after-school care rather than allowing him to care for his children instead.  The initial child support agreement between husband and wife provided for joint custody and for support payments to compensate the mother while she had custody of the children.  The agreement specifically excluded after-school care, but provided for before-school and summer-time care.  A year after the initial agreement, wife sued husband attempting to increase child support to include after-school care.  The husband cross-sued, arguing that he was making less money and that he was available to take care of the children after-school, thus obviating the need for increased support payments.  The father pointed out that Virginia law requires a court to consider the willingness and availability of a noncustodial parent to provide child care in determining whether child-care costs are necessary or excessive.

The court acknowledged that argument, but held that it would be wholly inappropriate to allow husband to provide after-school care while wife had custody of the children.  The court pointed to evidence of husband’s hostility and volatility toward wife, stating that these factors outweighed the considerations provided by law.  The husband was ordered to pay additional child support and denied the ability to provide after-school care himself.


10/16/2009
M. Scott Bucci
Comments (0)

Biological Father’s Eight-Year Custody Battle Finally Concludes

The Supreme Court of Virginia recently affirmed a custody award to a guardian rather than the child’s biological father, thus ending a long battle to determine the child’s proper caregiver.

In Florio v. Clark, the parents of Jacob Florio never married and were separated at the time of his birth.  In 1997, the Gloucester County Juvenile and Domestic Relations Court entered an order providing that the mother was to have custody with “liberal visitation” to the father.  Soon thereafter, the mother and Jacob moved in with the mother’s sister and her husband (the Clarks), and Mr. Clark acted as a surrogate father to Jacob.  During that time, Jacob’s biological father made few efforts to contact his son.

In 2001 Jacob’s mother developed heart disease and passed away.  Immediately before her passing, his mother had named her sister (Mrs. Clark) to be Jacob’s guardian.  Just two days after the mother’s death, father petitioned the JDR court for custody of Jacob.  That petition was granted, and Jacob was transferred to his father’s custody.  Five months later, the Clarks challenged that custody determination, and the court reconsidered.  It ruled that Jacob’s father was unfit to have custody because he was living in a trailer with his poarents, he was without any income, and he had no means of transportation.  Jacob’s father appealed the decision to circuit court, which upheld the award of custody to the Clarks.  The father appealed that decision to the Virginia Court of Appeals, where the custody award was again upheld against him
.  Jacob’s father finally appealed to the Supreme Court in 2009, where the highest court in Virginia agreed with the lower courts.

The Supreme Court stated that custody should be awarded according to the best interests of the child.  In Virginia, courts will grant a biological parent the presumption of fitness to parent, and award him custody unless that presumption is rebutted.  The Court then cited to the father’s absence, his lack of support over the years, and his inability to provide for Jacob.  These elements established the biological father’s unfitness as a father, and the court awarded the Clarks custody for good.


Labels: child custody
10/7/2009
Mark D. Dix
Comments (0)

Federal lawsuit filed by husband backfires in custody case

The Virginia Court of Appeals recently affirmed a trial court’s reassessment of child custody rights following a divorce settlement.  In Serdah v. Serdah, husband and wife separated and entered into a settlement agreement.  They agreed to joint legal custody of their only son, with primary physical custody to wife.  The parties also agreed that wife would have tie-breaking power in the event of a disagreement between them.  Nearly two years later, presumably due to disagreements between the parties, wife filed a motion to amend custody from joint legal custody to sole legal custody in Juvenile & Domestic Relations Court.  In response, the husband filed a lawsuit in federal court, alleging that wife’s increasing control over their son violated his Fourteenth Amendment liberty interests to the companionship, care, custody, and control of his son.  The wife lost in JDR Court and appealed to the local trial court, where she argued that the husband’s separate federal lawsuit evidenced his inability to deal with her in child-related matters. 

The trial court agreed and admitted the lawsuit into evidence, holding that the husband’s allegations in the federal suit helped determine the best interests of the child pursuant to the Virginia’s child custody laws.  The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court, holding that because the husband’s federal lawsuit tended to prove a fact in issue (the husbands willingness and ability to deal with the wife), it was properly admitted into evidence and considered by the court.


Labels: child custody
Bookmark and Share


Free Online Evaluation

Name:

Phone:

Email:

Tell us more:


Bucci & Dix
10710 Midlothian Turnpike
Suite 304
Richmond, VA 23235
Phone: (804) 897-3950
Fax: (804) 379-0173

Get Directions











Testimonials

View All

B&D Library

Divorce

view all

Child Custody

view all

Slip and Fall, Falling Merchandise, Premises Liability

view all

Recent Decisions

view all

Courts

view all

Damages

view all

Wrongful Death

view all

Insurance

view all

Latest Videos

Divorce:

Child Custody:

Labor & Employment, Civil Rights and Discrimination:

view all