Christopher P. Fitzgerald

The respondent father brought a contempt motion against the applicant mother for overholding their child.

The child was returned before the motion, and the court dismissed the contempt motion as it was not in the child's best interests.

In this costs decision, the court found the father was justified in preparing the motion materials but should not have argued the motion after the child was returned.

The court awarded the father $1,500 in costs.

The parties separated and the respondent father had been exercising supervised access to their two-year-old child.

Both parties brought motions for interim relief, with the hearing focused on whether the respondent's access should be changed to unsupervised and expanded to include overnights.

The court found that the respondent had demonstrated the ability to provide quality care for the child and that it was in the child's best interests to transition to unsupervised, expanded access, including overnight visits.