Absolutely nothing about that issue was incorporated in the final order. Here's the precise issue: The parties (mother vs. father) was ordered to jointly choose a therapist for their child. The mother broke that order, unilaterally and exclusively hired a therapist who she indoctrinated with false allegations and took the influenced child to that therapist. The bias therapist has been ever since in further cases by the mother to keep the father from much time with his child. Again, in that original case, contempt was never handled and the "issue" of the therapist was not addressed in the final order in the (injunction) case.
So, can the father still go back and seek contempt of court in that closed case to get it on record that the mother did in fact violate a court order to get the therapist she is using now in another (third) related family law case? (one element to through at you is that in the second related case, a judge did allow the therapist to be involved--but I don't see how that negates the black and white issue that in the first case there was a violated court order ny the hiring of the therapist)
I truly aim to please you as a customer, but please keep in mind that I do not know what you already know or don't know, or with what you need help, unless you tell me. Please consider that I am answering the question or question that is posed in your posting based upon my reading of your post and sometimes misunderstandings can occur. If I did not answer the question you thought you were asking, please respond with the specific question you wanted answered.
Kindly remember the ONLY WAY experts receive any credit at all for spending time with customers is if you click on OK, GOOD or EXCELLENT SERVICE even though you have made a deposit or are a subscription customer. YOU MUST COMPLETE THE RATING FOR THE EXPERT TO RECEIVE ANY CREDIT, if not the site keeps your money on deposit.
Also remember, sometimes the law does not support what we want it to support, but that is not the fault of the person answering the question, so please be courteous.
I'm not saying the mother is on a third therapist. I said we are on our third, separate case. The mother has is still using the same therapist that she violated an order to hire in the first case. My attorney in the first case only tried to address the issue of the unilateral hiring of the therapist in the first case by asking the court to appoint a new therapist but that did not happen. We just never filed for contempt because that attorney was being to passive. So, I do have proof I did not agree to the unilateral hiring but a motion for contempt and enforcement was never filed.
So, although the case is closed, can I go back and file a motion for contempt in that case on that specific issue? Is there any case law that can support that? I usually ask "Socrateaser" questions and he provides case law for me.
DISCLAIMER: Answers from Experts on JustAnswer are not substitutes for the advice of an attorney. JustAnswer is a public forum and questions and responses are not private or confidential or protected by the attorney-client privilege. The Expert above is not your attorney, and the response above is not legal advice. You should not read this response to propose specific action or address specific circumstances, but only to give you a sense of general principles of law that might affect the situation you describe. Application of these general principles to particular circumstances must be done by a lawyer who has spoken with you in confidence, learned all relevant information, and explored various options. Before acting on these general principles, you should hire a lawyer licensed to practice law in the jurisdiction to which your question pertains.
The responses above are from individual Experts, not JustAnswer. The site and services are provided “as is”. To view the verified credential of an Expert, click on the “Verified” symbol in the Expert’s profile. This site is not for emergency questions which should be directed immediately by telephone or in-person to qualified professionals. Please carefully read the Terms of Service (last updated February 8, 2012).