The mother sought sole custody, child support, and imputation of income against the father, who claimed to be a 'sovereign' and disputed the court's jurisdiction.
The father refused to participate meaningfully in the proceedings or provide financial disclosure.
The court granted the mother sole custody, noting the child's special needs and the father's sporadic, disruptive involvement.
The father was granted supervised access subject to strict conditions.
Due to his failure to provide income information, the court imputed the father's income at $250,000 based on his business interests and a previous child support order, ordering him to pay ongoing and retroactive child support.
