Bouchra Frank v. Richard A. Frank (2014)

MEMORANDUM OF DECISION ON PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO MODIFY POSTJUDGMENT

The plaintiff Bouchra Frank and the defendant Richard A. Frank were married on August 24, 2007 and divorced on August 30, 2013.   The parties are the parents of one child, Amaani, born on August 30, 2010.   The judgment of dissolution incorporated by reference the parties' parenting responsibility plan, which was entered into on June 5, 2013 (# 110.00).   On January 24, 2014, the plaintiff filed a motion to modify the terms of the judgment of dissolution entered on August 30, 2013 (the August 2013 dissolution judgment) with respect to the parenting responsibility plan (# 123.00).

The parties were before the court on February 10, 2014 on the plaintiff's motion for modification.   The court heard testimony and argument from each of the parties, both of whom were representing themselves.   For the reasons set forth below, the court finds that the plaintiff's requested modifications to the parenting plan are in the best interests of Amaani and grants the plaintiff's motion to modify the August 30, 2013 dissolution judgment.

I

The plaintiff is seeking to have the court modify the terms of the parties' parenting responsibility plan incorporated by reference in the August 2013 dissolution judgment.   Under the parenting responsibility plan, the parties have joint legal custody of Amaani.   Physical custody of Amaani is with the plaintiff.   The parenting responsibility plan provides that “[n]either party will take the child out of the tri-state area without mutual consent.”   This provision was reiterated in the parties' September 16, 2013 postjudgment agreement (# 121.00) that resolved a motion for contempt filed by the defendant (# 115.00).

The plaintiff is seeking modification of the provision in the parenting responsibility plan that prohibits removing the child from the “tri-state area” without “mutual consent” so that she can take Amaani to visit her maternal grandparents in Morocco.   The defendant does not consent to the Morocco trip.   The plaintiff asks that the provision be amended so that she can travel with the child internationally each year, whether or not the defendant agrees, because the defendant is arbitrarily refusing to consent.   She also requests that the defendant be ordered to sign a written consent form in advance of the trip.

The defendant objects to the modifications that the plaintiff is seeking in the parenting responsibility plan.   He said that Amaani had lived with her maternal grandparents for a year, and he did not want her to leave again because she had been gone for so long.   He also said that they had cut the child's hair.   The plaintiff pointed out that she and the defendant had agreed that the child could live with her maternal grandparents during that time.

The plaintiff wants to travel with Amaani to Morocco on March 30, 2014.   She intends to return with the child to Connecticut on or before April 30, 2014.   Neither party suggested that the plaintiff would not come back to Connecticut with Amaani.¹  The plaintiff has traveled back and forth between Morocco and Connecticut with Amaani on previous occasions.

II

General Statutes § 46b–56(a) provides in relevant part that “[i]n any controversy before the Superior Court as to the custody or care of minor children ․ the court may make or modify any proper order regarding the custody, care, education, visitation and support of the children General Statutes § 46b–56(a).  Section 46b–56(a) “provides the court [with] broad authority to make or modify any proper order regarding the custody, care, education, visitation and support of minor children in dissolution actions.”   (Citations omitted;  internal quotation marks omitted.)  Balaska v. Balaska, 130 Conn.App. 510, 515, 25 A.3d 680 (2011).

As our Supreme Court has observed, “[i]t is well settled in this state that, in deciding custody or visitation issues, a court must always be guided by what is in the best interests of the child.”  (Citations omitted.)  Ireland v. Ireland, 246 Conn. 413, 419, 717 A.2d 676 (1998).  General Statutes § 46b–56(b) provides that, “[i]n making or modifying any order as provided in subsection (a) of this section, the rights and responsibilities of both parents shall be considered and the court shall enter orders accordingly that serve the best interests of the child and provide the child with the active and consistent involvement of both parents commensurate with their abilities and interests ․” General Statutes § 46b–56(b).  See Szczerkowski v. Karmelowicz, 60 Conn.App. 429, 433, 759 A.2d 1050 (2000) (standard the court applies is that of the best interest of the child when ruling on a motion to modify visitation);  Kelly v. Kelly, 54 Conn.App. 50, 57, 732 A.2d 808 (1999) (trial court to be guided by the best interests of the child in modifying an order concerning visitation).

The court finds that it is in Amaani's best interests for the parenting responsibility plan to be modified as requested by the plaintiff.   The child lived for a year with her maternal grandparents in Morocco.   She will benefit from traveling with the plaintiff to Morocco to have annual extended visits with them.   The court does not credit the defendant's objection to the plaintiff's proposed trip to Morocco with the child.   The defendant's objection appears to be arbitrary, with no reasonable basis, particularly in view of the plaintiff's prior travel with the child to Morocco, to which the defendant consented.

Because it is in the best interests of the child to travel internationally, the plaintiff shall provide a “minor travel consent form” for her proposed trip to Morocco with Amaani to the defendant for his signature on or before March 3, 2014.   The defendant shall return a signed and notarized “minor travel consent form” to the plaintiff on or before March 5, 2014.   If Amaani does not already have a passport, the defendant shall cooperate with the plaintiff to obtain a passport for the child.   The defendant shall appear in person with the plaintiff at a Department of State Passport Agency, or provide the plaintiff with a written and notarized consent in the form required by the United States Department of State, Form DS–3053, on or before March 5, 2014.   The plaintiff shall retain possession of the child's passport.   The parties' postjudgment agreement dated September 16, 2013 will also be modified as set forth above in the best interests of the child.

IV

The court has fully considered the criteria set forth in General Statutes § 46b–56, as well as the evidence, the relevant case law, and the demeanor and the credibility of the parties in making the findings set forth above and in reaching the decisions reflected in the orders that issue below.   Accordingly, the plaintiff's motion to modify the August 30, 2013 judgment of dissolution, which incorporated by reference the parties' June 5, 2013 parenting responsibility plan, is hereby GRANTED, and is hereby ORDERED as follows.

1. The August 30, 2013 dissolution judgment and the parties' September 16, 2013 postjudgment agreement are modified to provide that the plaintiff may travel with the child to Morocco on or about March 30, 2014, returning on or before April 30, 2014.

2. The plaintiff shall provide a “minor travel consent form” for her proposed trip to Morocco with the child to the defendant for his signature on or before March 3, 2014.

3. The defendant shall return a signed and notarized “minor travel consent form” to the plaintiff for her proposed trip to Morocco with the child on or before March 5, 2014.

4. The defendant shall cooperate with the plaintiff to obtain a passport for Amaani if she does not already have one.   The defendant shall appear in person with the plaintiff at a Department of State Passport Agency, or provide the plaintiff with a written and notarized consent in the form required by the United States Department of State, Form DS–3053, on or before March 5, 2014.

5. The plaintiff shall retain possession of the child's passport.

6. The August 2013 dissolution judgment and the parties' September 16, 2013 postjudgment agreement are further modified to provide that the plaintiff may travel with the child anywhere in the United States, provided that (a) if the plaintiff and the child will be away from the state of Connecticut for more than twenty-four hours, the plaintiff shall advise the defendant of the travel plans (including lodging and transportation details and contact information) at least forty-eight hours prior to the anticipated departure, and (b) the plaintiff and the child shall return to Connecticut no later than thirty days after their departure.

7. The August 30, 2013 dissolution judgment and the parties' September 16, 2013 postjudgment agreement are further modified to provide that the plaintiff may travel with the child internationally, provided that (a) if the plaintiff and the child will be away from the state of Connecticut for more than twenty-four hours, the plaintiff shall advise the defendant of the travel plans (including lodging and transportation details and contact information) at least fourteen days prior to the anticipated departure date, and (b) the plaintiff and the child shall return to Connecticut no later than thirty days after their departure.

8. With respect to the plaintiff's international travel with the child in the future, the plaintiff shall provide a “minor travel consent form” to the defendant for his signature at least fourteen days prior to the anticipated departure date.   The defendant shall provide the plaintiff with a signed and notarized “minor travel consent form” at least seven days prior to the anticipated departure date.

BY THE COURT,

HELLER, J.

FOOTNOTES

FN1. The plaintiff is employed as a sales associate at Whole Foods in Darien, Connecticut.   There was no indication from either party that the plaintiff had any intention of leaving her job and relocating to Morocco with the child..  FN1. The plaintiff is employed as a sales associate at Whole Foods in Darien, Connecticut.   There was no indication from either party that the plaintiff had any intention of leaving her job and relocating to Morocco with the child.

Heller, Donna Nelson, J.