Via WINK NEWS – LEE COUNTY, Fla.- The saga surrounding Mindy McCready’s custody battle over her son, Zander McCready, continues.

Mindy McCready’s mother and stepfather, Gayle and Michael Inge, have released the following statement:

“Currently, our grandson is in foster care with strangers with the State of Arkansas. We would like to express our gratitude to the Florida Department of Children and Families for its effort in this case and also to the Arkansas foster family for their help in taking care of our grandson. We would like to plea for his return to Florida before Christmas.

The accusations made by Mindy McCready against us are false and hurtful. These accusations are the same accusations made by Mindy for the past four years and have been thoroughly investigated by the Florida Department of Children and Families and the presiding judge in our grandson’s case. We cannot get into specifics due to confidentiality in any child dependency matter.

The Arkansas Department of Human Services seems to be claiming jurisdiction over this case in violation of the UCCJEA (Unifom Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act). Their position is in stark opposition to the basic principals outlined in the UCCJEA. We disagree with Arkansas DHS’s position as Florida has home state jurisdiction under the UCCJEA and a Florida Court has been involved in this case since 2007. In fact, there was a hearing in the Florida Court that concluded in early November for which a decision was pending at the time Mindy fled to Arkansas with the child. We are our grandson’s legal guardians.

The court in Arkansas has not yet ruled on the claims of the Arkansas DHS and has not yet ruled on the threshold issue of whether it even has jurisdiction under the UCCJEA to hear the case. It is our opinion that the State of Florida has ‘home state’ jurisdiction over this case, not the State of Arkansas. More practically speaking, having a case such as this handled in a state over a thousand miles away from our grandson’s family, doctors, teachers and classmates is an absurd and unjust result and clearly not in the best interest of our grandson. Our grandson is in the custody of strangers for the Holidays. This is the first time in his life he has been with strangers. It is hard for us as a family to see how in any way this is the best interest of our grandson. He is only a 5-year-old boy. He has been stolen by his mother, recovered from authorities hiding in a closet, then put in the care of strangers. How could this possibly be in the best interest of our grandson?

In custody and dependency matters justice delayed is often a failure of justice. Please join us in our prayers that the Arkansas court can reach its decision on the UCCJEA issue sooner rather than later so our grandson can return home to us, his family and friends in Lee County for the holidays.”

http://www.winknews.com/Local-Florida/2011-12-21/Inges-release-statement-regarding-McCready-custody-battle

LEE COUNTY, Fla. — A WINK News exclusive: The Mindy McCready custody battle heats up.  WINK News has confirmed the county singer’s son, Zander, will remain in an Arkansas foster home through Christmas.

McCready recently accused her mother of being abusive toward Zander.  Inge denies the allegations.  Ultimately a judge will have the final say on who gets custody.

http://www.winknews.com/Local-Florida/2011-12-20/WINK-ExclusiveMcCreadys-son-to-stay-in-foster-home-for-now

When parents separate by divorce, children are left in the middle of the financial separation. Even when one parent is paying child support, this may or may not be intended to cover additional medical expenses. One or both parents may be ordered to provide medical insurance for the children, but what happens with any additional medical costs?

If parties have an agreement, either party can cover the expenses, the expenses can be shared, or there may be another way to divide the uncovered expenses based on the proportion of the parents’ incomes.

Typically, courts will order both parents to equally share the burden of any uncovered medical expenses. Realistically, this may be difficult to accomplish, as one parent is usually in left in the position of having to front the bill, while waiting to collect from the other parent. This issue can be enforced by a court order should it become a problem, especially where there are excessive expenses for children. As always, it is in the best interest of the children involved for the parents to work together to support their joint children. Courts will use this standard to identify almost any issue regarding the parties’ minor children in family law cases.

See Rushetsky v. Rushetsky, 36 Fla. L. Weekly D2228.

Patricia Dills is an Attorney with Martin Law Firm, P.L., whose practice
focuses in Divorce, Child Support, Family Law, and Civil Litigation. She
primarily practices in Naples, Collier County, and Fort Myers, Lee County Florida.

Congress adopted the Fair Debt Collections Practices Act (FDCPA) among growing concerns of abusive, deceptive, and unfair debt collection practices by debt collectors.  The most important thing to remember about the Act is that it only applies to third party debt collectors.  This means that the provisions and protections of the Act do not apply to the actual lender or the bank itself, but it does apply to collection agencies and collection attorneys who are contacting you on behalf of the bank or primary lender.  Among other protections, the Act provides that a debt collector may not communicate with a consumer:

1. Before 8:00am or after 9:00 PM.
2. If the debt collector knows that the consumer is represented by an attorney.
3. At the consumer’s place of employment if the debt collector knows or has reason to know that the consumer’s employer prohibits the consumer from receiving such communication.

The act also forbids harassment, abuse, and false or misleading statements.   A debt collector also cannot use obscene language or threaten you with violence or criminal prosecution.   You cannot go to jail for not paying a debt.

One of the strongest provisions of the FDCPA is found under section 1692(c).  Pursuant to this section if a consumer notifies a debt collector in writing that the consumer refuses to pay a debt or that the consumer wishes the debt collector to cease further communication with the consumer, the debt collector needs to cease communication with that debtor or face penalties.   Also, once you inform a debt collector that you are represented by an attorney, he cannot communicate with you any further.

Please keep in mind that although the FDCPA limits the collection behavior of debt collectors, the original creditor or debt collector will still be able to pursue a judgment in a court of law.  At that point your only remedy is to contest the suit or to try to have the debt discharged pursuant to Bankruptcy Law.

Jonathan Bierfeld is an attorney with Martin Law Firm, P.L., whose practice focuses in Bankruptcy Law and Civil Litigation.  He is admitted to practice law in the State of Florida and the Federal Court for the Middle District of Florida.  He primarily practices in Lee County Florida in Cape Coral and Fort Myers, Florida.

After Ms. McCready’s hearing in Arkansas this week, WINK News Now returned to Martin Law Firm to further explain the legal implications involved with this case.  Attorney Steven Martin explained that Florida, which is the “home state,” would likely ultimately determine this matter.  However, the Arkansas Judge might delay the return of the child to Florida to investigate, if for example, there were allegations of abuse.

Ultimately this entire ordeal will likely be considered in determining the final custody arrangement within the entire scheme of the best interests of the child.  Attorney Martin speculates that while Ms. McCready may have won a small battle but that ultimately her tactics will not sway the case in her favor.

To see the WINK News story follow the following link where you will be connected directly to WINK News Now’s website: http://www.winknews.com/Local-Florida/2011-12-07/Experts-say-Mindy-McCready-will-have-trouble-getting-custody

Steven E. Martin’s practice focuses on family law, civil litigation, business planning, estate planning and real property law. Mr. Martin is a Past President of the Cape Coral Bar Association and is an active member of the Lee County Bar Association. Mr. Martin is a member of the Florida Bar’s Judicial Administration and Evaluation Committee, and the Calusa Chapter of the American Inns of Court. Mr. Martin is admitted to practice in the state of Florida and in the Federal Court for the Middle District of Florida. Mr. Martin practices in Lee County Florida in Cape Coral and Fort Myers, Florida and in Collier County Florida in Naples.

WINK News Now asked Martin Law Firm attorney Dustin Butler to explain issues regarding child custody matters to local viewers.  Specifically, Mr. Butler explained what a “pick-up” order means.  “A pick-up order is essentially the court ordering law enforcement to bring a child back to this jurisdiction.  To issue a pick-up order the court needed to have already made a time-sharing or custody determination.”

Mr. Butler went on to explain that the overriding priority for Florida courts is the “best interests” of the child.  The court will consider what is in the best interests of the child above all other concerns.  When asked to explain how the court would view a parent who violated a court order resulting in a pickup order Mr. Butler was quoted saying “we’re dealing with parents not behaving properly and the court will consider that within the grand scheme of what is in the best interests of the child.” 

To see the WINK News story follow the following link where you will be connected directly to WINK News Now’s website:

http://www.winknews.com/Local-Florida/2011-12-02/Missing-persons-flyer-issued-for-Zander-McCready

Dustin Michael Butler is an Attorney with Martin Law Firm, P.L., whose practice focuses in Family Law and Civil Litigation.  He is admitted to practice law in the State of Florida and the Federal Court for the Middle District of Florida. He primarily practices in Lee County Florida in Cape Coral and Fort Myers, Florida.

The short answer is the spouse vacating the home should usually be given some sort of credit to offset the value of remaining in the home.  Typically, the Court accomplishes this in two ways.  One way is through spousal support, the other is through equitable distribution.  A recent case dealt with this issue through equitable distribution. The court ordered the marital home sold; however, it permitted the husband to remain in the home until it was sold, provided he paid the mortgage, taxes, and other maintenance fees.  The court did not allow the husband any offset in the equitable distribution finding only that it was offset by the fair rental value of the home. The court did not make any findings as to the amount of the fair rental value for the home.

Mortgage and other maintenance expenses do not necessarily equal the fair rental value of the home.  When the court is making a distribution such as this it is necessary for it to determine the fair rental value and make an offset equal to the deficiency or excess of the payments made by the spouse remaining in the home and the fair rental value of the home.

See, Tuomey v. Tuomey, 36 Fla. L. Weekly D2539 (Fla. 5th DCA 2011).

Dustin Michael Butler is an Attorney with Martin Law Firm, P.L., whose practice focuses in Family Law and Civil Litigation.  He is admitted to practice law in the State of Florida and the Federal Court for the Middle District of Florida. He primarily practices in Lee County Florida in Cape Coral and Fort Myers, Florida.