Jose Ramirez vs Cristina Beltran
Case No: 1439394
Hearing Date: Tue Oct 22, 2019 10:30

Nature of Proceedings: RFO

RFO

Attorneys

Petitioner Jose Ramirez [“father”] in pro per

Respondent Christina Beltran [“mother”] represented by Geoff Newlan

Ruling: Father has failed to file any response and failed to go to mediation; he leaves the Court with no alternative; mother’s request must be granted for the time being. The matter is continued to December 17, 2019 at 10:30 am; father shall schedule a mediation to be completed well before that date; father’s response to mother’s RFO to be filed by November 12, 2019 and mother’s Reply to be filed by November 26, 2019.

Analysis

On 9/6 mother filed a RFO seeking child custody and parenting time orders related to their minor child DOB 10/2011 [age 8]; she sought changes from the order for legal or physical custody orders made in 3/2016 and the parenting time orders of 10/2018 giving father every 3rd weekend with one month every summer and setting holidays; the 2015 custody order required supervision and three hours twice a month and slowly Judge Herman allowed more contact and less restrictive contact between Jose and their son; in 2016 father saw son more, but still required supervision by family members; in October 2016 father was granted one overnight each month; when mother moved to Arizona in October 2018 the court granted father extended periods of overnight visits unsupervised; son’s school started 8/6/2019 and father came to Arizona to visit him; mother reports she told son on Wednesday that he would be seeing his father on Friday; son expressed extreme distress and stated his refusal to go; this last week CPS contacted mother because of reports son made to his school teachers that are consistent with what he told mother: to wit, father hit him and he was afraid to go with him; mother requests that the Court conduct a short evidentiary hearing after mediation at the hearing date of this motion, so the Court can determine what contact with father, if any, is appropriate at this time; she believes no contact should be ordered until son can continue with therapy for some time and the therapist can recommend resuming contact.

The filed reflects mediation was set for 10/18/19 and that father was given notice of the date and time.

POS shows father was served 9/5/19 with the RFO and the Notice of Mediation; there is no response to the RFO in the file.

Mediation reported that mediation did not go forward on 10/18 because father failed to appear.

Father has failed to file any response and more importantly failed to go to mediation; he leaves the Court with no alternative; mother’s request must be granted for the time being.