jumbledone wrote:I think you've been asked to look in a mirror by this community for a while. I think your atty is now doing the same thing. You can pound the atty into the sand and request that additional things be added, but if your atty thinks that separating things and waiting (or not bringing them at all) to improve how you look to the court is wise, search deep and see if there might be a kernal of truth in there somewhere.
I get what you are saying Jumble and have done so for a while. My attorney was mentioning during our meeting that the way the laws are written in this not so forward thinking state, a judge may think that this is one parent's vandetta against another even based on the circumstances of the NJ simply being lazy and caving into S8's wishes of not wanting to go to school (documentated via the school and counselors). It was explained that the legislature does not want to have divorced parents revisit the custody issue just because (i.e. one parent is p-ssed off at the other).
I'm trying to understand your how I look statement? I'm not the one having extreme issues getting S8 to school or having the cops/crisis team called to my residence to deal with an eight year old.
The board preaches about having multiple issues when going to court to make it worth while and asking for the moon when having to go to the court. Humor me on why it wouldn't be prudent to combine both issues and ask the court for as many things as possible (such as legal fees, reimbursement of possible school fees since it is a private school, ect)? IMO it makes sense to do all items at the same time. If it is a draw on the school issue, the tax issue is a slam dunk because of what the IRS (a federal agency) requires.