Elizabeth Midolo

The court determined costs following a motion and cross-motion regarding parenting time, child support, and financial disclosure.

Success was divided, with the moving party securing unsupervised parenting time and the responding party succeeding on issues of baby-proofing, COVID-19 protocols, child support, and financial disclosure.

Given the divided success and the moving party's failure to provide court-ordered financial disclosure, the court declined to order costs to either party.

The respondent father brought a motion for compliance against the applicant mother, alleging she failed to obey a final parenting order when their two children refused to attend scheduled parenting time.

The mother argued the children, aged 14 and 11, were refusing to go and she could not force them.

The court found the mother failed to meet her positive obligation to actively encourage and facilitate the parenting time, instead leaving the decision up to the children and emboldening their non-compliance.

The court granted the father's motion in part, finding a breach of the order and imposing sanctions under Rule 1(8) of the Family Law Rules.

The Father brought a motion seeking increased parenting time and disclosure of the child's information.

The Mother brought a cross-motion for child support, retroactive child support, income disclosure, and baby-proofing of the Father's home.

The court ordered three supervised visits for the Father, transitioning to unsupervised alternating weekend parenting time.

The Mother's request for a different supervisor was denied.

Temporary child support of $573 per month was ordered, with retroactive support deferred to a full evidentiary hearing.

Various orders regarding communication, safety measures, and disclosure were also made.