L. Perelman

The respondent mother brought an urgent motion seeking to have the applicant father's parenting time supervised after he failed multiple drug tests for cocaine.

The father denied drug use, claiming the positive tests resulted from passive exposure, and relied on letters from his treating addictions physician to support this theory.

The court exercised its gatekeeper function and rejected the physician's opinion on passive ingestion, finding he was a participant expert without toxicological expertise.

Finding strong prima facie evidence of the father's renewed cocaine use and inadequate care, the court ordered that his parenting time be supervised and directed a section 30 parenting assessment.

The parties separated in 2012 and maintained a cooperative parenting arrangement for their two children until early 2015.

Conflict escalated, culminating in the respondent withholding the children from the applicant's scheduled parenting time and threatening to call the police.

The applicant brought an urgent motion for interim custody and access, and the respondent brought a counter-motion seeking primary residence.

The court rejected the respondent's unsubstantiated allegations of abuse and alienation, finding her actions were designed to gain an advantage in the proceeding.

The court granted joint interim custody and ordered a 50/50 week-about parenting schedule, finding it to be in the best interests of the children.