Family Law Questions? Ask a Family Lawyer Online.
Thank you for your follow-up and thank you very much for requesting me to explain further. Please allow me to do so below.
Here is what I meant. Based on my most educated guesswork, I assume that the language of the clause you listed about shared activity was meant to be more limited to actual aster-school or relatively short events, and not to overnight trips. The judge, if it is the same judge, has not clarified the language which would mean that at least as far it currently stands, the ex is reading the condition properly. Under the current interpretation, his request to see the kids on sanctioned overnight trips is valid because it is an after-school and shared activity, it was just likely not what he judge had in mind. Purely textually the ex is right, but likely based on policy the judge was (or still is) seeking to limit the scope. That would mean that you may want to file a motion for clarification pertaining to that clause and ask it to be more limited in nature. Otherwise the judge has a stronger case to agree with your ex and actually find you in contempt by not allowing him to spend time with your son.
Hope that clarifies!