Case Results - Child Support

CHILD CUSTODY CASE RESULTS

Heller v. Williams

ISSUE: Mother was victim of serious domestic violence at hands of father. Father evaded service of domestic violence restraining order.

RESULT: After service, court held trial where it ordered 100% custody to mother, no visitation to father.

Marriage of Anderson

ISSUE: Father lived 400miles from children; Mother gave him no custody of 2 children. He had not seen his children for one year in person.

RESULT: Father now has thirty five percent time with children, including alternate 3 day weekends, spring break, alternate thanksgiving break visitation, alternate winter visitation, and substantial visitation during summer time.

Marriage of Sepulveda

ISSUE: Father was not able to see children despite court order for day visits only, had not seen children for 3 months.

RESULT: After a contempt trial, mother was found guilty of contempt and faces sentencing for jail time. Father now has in person contact with his children, going from zero percent time to thirty-five percent time, including three weekends a month, alternating holiday visits, and daily Skype visits with children.

Montoya v. Portillo

ISSUE: Father unable to have time with children because mother moved 210 miles away from him after he moved closer to see children. Father only had alternating weekends, again.

RESULT: During court trial, opposing side settled matter in Father’s favor, agreeing to give him first half of the month with children, every month. Client went from 13.5% time to 50% time with children.

Schwartz v. Schwartz

ISSUE: Father was victim of severe domestic violence from mother. Mother hired attorney to seek a restraining order against him, despite her being the abuser.

RESULT: After hiring Provinziano & Associates, father received a restraining order, sole legal and physical custody of children. Mother’s restraining order dismissed. Mother has supervised visitation only.

Marriage of Kean

ISSUE: Mother was not represented at ex parte hearing where judge ordered small baby out of her custody 4 – 5 times per week for 10 hours, mother felt she was not having her case fairly heard before hiring Provinziano & Associates.

RESULT: Mother was able to get court-ordered drug testing of father. Court reversed prior decision and decreased father’s time to 3 times per week for four hours with baby, allowing mother to have more time with infant child.

Nordquist v. Peoples

ISSUE: Mother lived 3,126 miles away from Father that just got out of the military and allowed him no visitation with children when the Father hired Provinziano & Associates.

RESULT: Father now has entire Summer school break with child, entire Winter break, entire Spring break, daily phone contact with children and ability to come back to court for more time if he moves closer to children.

Mendez v. Bock

ISSUE: Mother hired Provinzano & Associates because father had severe mental health challenges and drug issues and wanted unsupervised visitation with child, which she opposed.

RESULT: Court ordered sole legal and sole physical custody to mother, no visitation with father, subject to mother’s discretion.

Marriage of Griffith

ISSUE: Mother hired Provinziano & Associates when father submitted fraudulent judgment to Court giving him full custody of the children, despite father’s recent conviction of a sex crime.

RESULT: Mother received sole legal and physical custody of children, no visitation to father. Court set aside judgment on grounds of fraud.

*Party names have been changed to protect client confidentiality. Case results are not a guarantee as to the outcome of a case.

“We will find a unique and creative strategy to resolve your family law problem!”

– Alphonse Provinziano

 

(877) 579-7101
Contact us to receive your free consultation!








Regarding the discussion of past case results and client reviews, the same result may not be available depending on the facts of a different case, such as cases of future prospective clients. Past case results and client reviews are atypical. The information on this website does not constitutes a guarantee as to a result. The information on this website does not constitute legal advice and is for informational purposes only. This website does not create an attorney client relationship. Expressions of opinion regarding the quality of representation does not constitute a guarantee and consists solely of the opinion of the author. This website is attorney advertisement.

© PROVINZIANO & ASSOCIATES | Privacy Policy | Disclaimer of Warranties