632 Continental Rd
Hatboro, PA 19040
Legal Research and Writing
Project Number: 008035
Civil Action No. 35 of 2014
IN THE MATTER OF
SALLY BRIGHT..PETITIONER
V
JOHN BRIGHT..RESPONDENT
Comes Sally bright by counsel and for her Memorandum states as follows:
- FACTS
The Petitioner, Sally Bright was married to the Respondent John Bright, but later separated due to marital difficulties. Later, Sally Bright filed for a divorce petition and the court granted her temporary custody of their fourteen year old daughter Chastity.
- ISSUES
Both parties desire to have custody of their child.
- The family code in this state provides the grounds for the judge to hear and consider the interests of all the parties before granting custody of the child to either of the parties. This is in view of the fact that the child whose custody is being contested is a minor, specifically 14 years of age. John Bright, the father is a gay with a male companion, the fact that makes Chastity feel “weird.” This comes to be known during a counselling session with Dr. Frank Edwards.
- PETITIONER’S RELOCATION.
The Petitioner informed the Respondent that she would be relocating to another state because she had found another job over at the new state. Accordingly, she presented that her new job would pay well $350000 annually. Just as in the case in Lafayette Circuit Court, Civil no. 113, (P.A Civil (Cir.) (113) where the petitioner filed for divorce in similar grounds, In that one of the spouses was moving away.
- INCOME OF PARTIES.
Despite the fact that the Petitioner earns much lesser than the Respondent does not imply that she cannot provide for the child, on the other hand, Jon can back up Sally as far as the upkeep and maintenance of the child is concerned.
- CAN THE CHILD DECIDE WHO SHE WANTS TO STAY WITH?
The person in question is a minor, who in the legal terms and fraternity cannot be relied on to make a viable and legal binding decision. As much as she, Chastity expressed her wish to stay her father, nonetheless her age disqualifies her opinion and absolute wish in this matter.
- RESPONDENT’S HISTORY OF PHYSICAL ABUSE AND EXCESSIVE CONSUMPTION OF ALCOCHOL.
111. CONCLUSION
Awarding John Bright, the respondent custody of the child will affect her wellbeing and will not be in her best interest.
Civil Action No. 35 of 2014
IN THE MATTER OF
SALLY BRIGHT..PETITIONER
V
JOHN BRIGHT..RESPONDENT
Comes Sally bright by counsel and for her Memorandum states as follows:
- FACTS
The Petitioner, Sally Bright was married to the Respondent John Bright, but later separated due to marital difficulties. Later, Sally Bright filed for a divorce petition and the court granted her temporary custody of their fourteen year old daughter Chastity.
- ISSUES
- RESPONDENT SHOULD BE AWARDED CUSTODY OF THE MINOR CHILD
The family code in this state provides the grounds for the judge to hear and consider the interests of all the parties before granting custody of the child to the respondent. In this case, the Respondent is financially stable and can take care of the child, unlike the Petitioner.
- PETITIONER’S RELOCATION
The Petitioner, Sally Bright informed john that she was moving to another state because she has found a new job. However, the child does not wish to move because she does not want to change schools and loss or miss her friends. Thus, the child can stay behind as the parents work out something, in terms of visitations. Just as in the case in Lafayette Circuit Court, Civil no. 113(P.A Civil (Cir.) (113) where the petitioner filed for divorce in similar grounds, In that one of the spouses was moving away.
- WILL THE RESPONDENT’S SEXUAL STATUS AFFECT THE CHILD’S DEVELOPMENT
The fact that the Respondent is gay does not imply that he is a bad parent. Everyone has the right to sexuality. In this case, the child wishes to stay with her dad despite stating that she feels “weird” with her dad’s companion. The fact that she is uneasy with his companion does not mean that it will affect her development. It is common for anyone to feel uneasy with a person that is not well known to them.
- WILL RELOCATION AFFECT THE VISITATION RIGHTS OF THE RESPONDENTS
Relocation to another state implies that the Respondent will not have easy access to the child. The limit in access is due to increased expenses in terms of travel. The court should consider the interest of the Respondent as a father of the child. The child requires the love and cares of both parents an aspect that may impact negatively if the father is denied a chance frequently to visit and mentor his daughter.
111. CONCLUSION
Awarding the Petitioner custody of the child will affect her wellbeing because she is not financially well off to cover the expenses the child. In addition, the child wishes to stay with her father and continue attending her current school.
References
Pennsylvania Family Code. Available at
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=fam&group= pa 27 bull 701 03001- 04000&file=3080-3089 retrieved on 20th June, 2014.
Civil marriage matter in Circuit (2006)139 Cal.App.4th 116 available at
https://ocapps.occourts.org pafamilylaw.foxrothschild.com/tags/child-support 327C232D4#top retrieved on 19th June, 2014.
