However, no evidence supporting the allegation was found through a record-search by Swedish authorities. Mother then alleged Father had been arrested in Sweden for touching an under-aged girl. A search of DFPS’s records revealed no evidence that Father had been investigated, charged, or arrested for any such abuse in Texas.įather’s ex-wife submitted a letter, and later an affidavit, stating that Father had never abused her or her daughter. Mother alleged the incident was investigated by the Texas Department of Family and Protective Services (“DFPS”). No residential addresses were revealed in the agreement, although Father agreed to “exercise his parenting time primarily at his residence.” The parties agreed to communicate exclusively by email, except for texting each other’s cell phones in case of an emergency.Īfter the temporary agreement was entered, Mother accused Father of sexual misconduct in Texas involving his ex-wife and step-daughter. The parties agreed, inter alia, to joint legal decision-making, initial parenting time, and to exchange their infant child at a police station. Several months after Slava Kostadinova (“Mother”) filed her petition for paternity in March 2013, the parties reached a temporary agreement under Arizona Rule of Family Law Procedure 69. Stephens (“Father”) as a sanction for having unreasonably defended against Father’s request to have his address protected from disclosure. The attorney for the other (“Counsel”) appeals the superior court’s award of attorney’s fees and costs to Mr. The following is that Court of Appeals decision. Stephens addressing the basis for a trial court to issue sanctions in the form of attorney fees against an attorney representing a wife in a paternity case. The Arizona Court of Appeals issued a memorandum decision in the case of Kostadinova vs.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |