Robb B Jones

Robb Jones

First, this review is not correct. I know exactly how the interrupted summer parent time works. Specifically, during the summer, each parent is often granted two weeks of "uninterrupted" parent time, and two weeks of "interrupted" parent time. The interrupted parent time means that during those two weeks, the other parent will have certain days or overnights with the parties' children during that time. Those days or overnights are often specified by the Decree, but if not, they are set by statute. While I cannot say for certain which client this is because the review is anonymous, I can say that I have had only one client bring up to me an issue regarding interrupted summer parent time recently. When that client inquired about her ex wanting such parent time, I notified her that her Decree granted her ex two weeks of interrupted parent time, and that the statute would set out the days and times for her parent time during that time. I provided an email identifying the statute which explicitly identified how the interrupted parent time was set and what her typical days and times would be. I then notified her that considering her ex's pattern of often canceling even on his regular parent time, I did not expect it would be likely that he would exercise such two week block, and thus that I thought he was attempting to manipulate her by asking about it. Additionally, i did explain that often times the issue of interrupted summer parent time does not come up. The reason why is because parents typically place a much higher value and/or concern on the blocks, dates and times of uninterrupted time, as that allows them to take vacations, etc. without having to worry about custody exchanges. Moving to this client's claim that I was not ready for hearings, and/or did not value her case. That is also incorrect. I have sympathy for this client, as evidence supported her belief that her ex had increased his income after we had entered her original Decree, which thus entitled her to re-calculate her child support. However, when we filed the Petition to Modify and Motion to Adjust Support, her ex was then laid off shortly after. That caused the Court to delay the matter for months to determine what her ex's income would be once he re-obtained employment. Once he did so, we were ready to move forward on a re-calculation of his support. This unfortunate circumstance left her waiting to obtain the increased support and potential back support. Shortly after her ex confirmed new employment and we were ready to move forward with increased support, she decided to no longer use my services. Finally, regarding me "talking this client out of things she wanted or needed." Again, if this is the same client, her Decree granted her the majority of the parent time with her son. This client wanted to lower her ex's parent time even more for a number of reasons. I did inform her that obtaining a modification where he would get less parent time would be very unlikely barring extremely significant circumstances. However, I did file a Petition to Modify on her behalf which requested her desired modification. Again, while I sympathize with this client, because I believed her concerns about the father were genuine, I also had to be up front with her about the unlikelihood of a modification based on the law's requirements and the consistent decisions that are made by courts and custody evaluators. Overall, I again sympathize very much with the difficulty that this client faced in adjusting the child support, obtaining back support, and/or attempting to modify her Decree. However, her difficulties were not caused by me failing to be invested in her case, and I did provide her accurate legal advice and descriptions about both interrupted parent time, and the low likelihood that she would be able to modify her ex's parent time.