Laurence Kimpan v. Tracy Blauser et al. (2011)

MEMORANDUM OF DECISION REGARDING DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR MODIFICATION (161), DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR CONTEMPT (162), PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR MODIFICATION (166) AND PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR CHILD SUPPORT (167)

A review of the record reveals that the parties, never married, are the parents of one minor child, Elizabeth Paige Blauser, born December 9, 1999.   On November 29, 2004, the parties agreed to joint legal custody with primary residence with the father and that the mother, residing out of state, could visit with the child one week per month, in Connecticut, but that the father would provide for her the sum of $435 to cover the cost of each visit.   On November 15, 2010, the court appointed attorney Jean Park as the child's Guardian ad litem and also permitted Ms. Erin Bustamante, the stepmother of the child and former wife of the plaintiff father, to intervene as a party.

The parties appeared, together with the Guardian ad litem, all of whom testified on January 19, 2011.

The court finds the following facts proven by a fair preponderance of the evidence.

1. The plaintiff and defendant, never married, are the parents of one minor child, Elizabeth Paige Blauser, born December 9, 1999.

2. On November 29, 2004, the parties agreed to joint legal custody with primary residence with the father and that the mother, residing out of state, could visit with the child one week per month, in Connecticut, but that the father would provide for her the sum of $435 to cover the cost of each visit.

3. The mother has not seen the child since July 2005 when she visited in Connecticut for a few hours.

4. The mother has not e-mailed, telephoned, sent a gift or a card to the child since July 2005.

5. The mother lives in West Virginia with her seven-year-old daughter from another relationship.

6. The mother acknowledges that she suffers from a Bipolar II condition, ADHD and PTSD and that she is receiving therapy and medication for those conditions.

7. The mother claims that the father has failed to answer her telephone calls or facilitate her visits with the child.   This is contradicted by her testimony, however, that in September 2010, she came to his house for a visit and he was cooperative with her.   She testified that the father attempted to arrange a therapeutic visit through the child's therapist which was unsuccessful and then called the child herself to suggest a visit.   She testified that the father reported “she doesn't want to see you.”

8. Notwithstanding the mother's contempt motion claiming that the father is interfering with her visits, she acknowledged that “he is not interfering.”

9. The mother has demonstrated no concrete efforts to facilitate visitation with her child in the past 5 1/2 years.

10. To her credit, the mother has enrolled in therapy in an effort to move forward with reunification with her child.

11. The mother has a sporadic work history and is presently neither working nor in school.   She testified that she is able to work and could likely work 25 hours per week at $10 per hour.   The court finds her earning capacity to be $250 per week gross.

12. The child is well settled in Connecticut and visits freely between her father and her father's ex-wife, her stepmother, who she refers to as “mom” and who has intervened as a party.

13. At the time of the hearing, the father and the stepmother requested that they be given joint custody of the child.   They were canvassed extensively regarding their rights and responsibilities of such an endeavor including issues which may arise pertaining to relocation (the father is in active duty in the United States Navy), child support and post-majority educational support.   The court finds they understood the rights and responsibilities of joint custody and that they had been properly advised by their attorney.

14. The Guardian ad litem testified that it would be in the best interest of the child for the father or the father and the stepmother to have joint custody of the minor child and that the mother's access only occur under therapeutic conditions.

15. The court finds that it would be in the best interest of the child for the father and the stepmother to have joint custody of the minor child and that the mother's access only occur under therapeutic conditions.

16. The mother is presently paying child support to the father in the amount of $7.23 per week.

ORDERS

1. The defendant's motion for contempt and for modification is denied.

2. The plaintiff's motion for modification and for child support is granted.

3. The father and the stepmother (Ms. Bustamante) shall have joint legal and physical custody of the minor child.

4. The stepmother shall enjoy reasonable rights of visitation as mutually agreeable between she and the father.

5. Prior to the mother and the child having contact of any kind, the following must first occur.

The mother shall establish and maintain a therapeutic relationship with a therapist experienced in reunification issues.

The mother shall execute a release for her therapist to communicate without restrictions with the child's therapist and with the child's Guardian ad litem.

The type, nature, content, duration and frequency of the mother's contact with the minor child shall be within the father's discretion, however, he is to be guided by the advice of the child's therapist, he shall not exercise his discretion in an arbitrary or capricious manner and his decisions in this regard shall be motivated solely out of concern for the child's emotional well-being.

Unless and until further order of this court, all access with the minor child and mother shall be within New London County, Connecticut.

In the event of any future dispute relative to the mother's access, the parties shall first consult with the child's Guardian ad litem in an effort to find a workable resolution.   Should that fail, then both parties are required to have their dispute mediated by the Family Relations Division of the Connecticut Superior Court, prior to seeking any relief from the court.   Should either party seek court relief to modify these orders, they must then comply with Practice Book § 25-26 and file a request for leave to amend.

7. The mother shall be responsible for 20%, the father shall be responsible for 40% and the stepmother shall be responsible for 40% of that portion of the minor child's therapy, not reimbursed or otherwise covered by medical insurance.   The father shall pay each bill in a timely manner and transmit a copy of each bill to the other responsible parties who shall reimburse the father their share within 30 days.

8. The mother shall pay child support to the father in the amount of $40 per week.

9. The stepmother shall pay child support to the father in the amount of $104 per week.

10. These figures are based on two sets of child support guidelines, one set between the father and mother, using mother's earning capacity of $250 per week and one set between father and stepmother and then crediting stepmother for the $40 being paid by the mother.   The court acknowledges that it has deviated due to the overall family support and the non-traditional parenting plan between the three responsible parties.

11. The court finds an arrearage from the mother to the father of 13 weeks at the rate of $7.23 per week for a total of $93.99 which shall be paid within 60 days.

12. The court finds that the Guardian ad litem has worked 18.3 hours and that a reasonable rate of compensation is $150 per hour which would be the sum of $2,745.

13. The court orders the father to pay 40% of that sum to the Guardian within four months, the stepmother to pay 40% of that sum to the Guardian within four months and the mother's share, 20% of 18.3 hours or 3.66 hours be paid by the State of Connecticut at state rates.

Shluger, J.

Shluger, Kenneth L., J.