Random Fuzzy

A Form 170 which is a Declaration for Default or Uncontested action was filed.  There is also a sealed Judgement - Status only.  It was entered on April 12.  April 12 is also the termination date.  The status of the case is still "Open." 

Unlike when the Judgment on the bifurcated issue of child custody and visitation was filed, this does not state that it is a judgement on the bifurcated issue of marital status or that jurisdiction is reserved over all financial issues which would still be left. 

It is notable that what should be a very simple judgement on status is sealed. The Judgement on Child Custody and Visitation and all accompanying filings were sealed per the seal order that has been in place since 2017.  Status is not covered.  Since this isn't obviously custody-related, this Judgement and all attachments had to be sealed thru a new court order issued the same day the filings were made.  For the court to approve a request to seal, they would have to show that sealing is in the best interests of the children.  That the filings are not simply about them but substantially concern the children.  Obviously, such would not be routine for a judgement on status only. 

They had previously explained that the Judgement on Custody and Visitation "is not permanent but rather a temporary agreement in place, for now, to keep things moving along in the right direction.”  They were “very pleased to be entering the next stage and relieved with progress for the health of their family.”  Such a judgement intended to be merely temporary is not routine either.

From the start, their legal filings were never what they appeared to be on the surface or what they would be for a normal dissolution filing.  There is nothing simple or routine and nothing that can be assumed unless stated or explained.  Since it is written as "status" and not "marital status," that is perhaps how they wanted it written and I will follow how they wanted it.

As we know from the past, all significant developments were preceded or accompanied by a statement.  The previous Judgement was announced via a statement by Samantha Bley DeJean before the filings appeared in the case summary.  But there has been no statement on this even long after the fact.  All People could manage to get was "Both parents are focused on what’s best for the kids” which serves to emphasize that this is not about their relationship. 



Filing Date:  09/19/2016
Case Type:  Dissolution w/ Minor Children (General Jurisdiction)
Status:  Open 09/19/2016

04/12/2019 Judgment - Status - only (Sealed Copy )
Filed by Petitioner
04/12/2019 Judgment - Status - only (Per Court order of 4-12-19, attachments to Judgment - Staus only are sealed (4 pages). Termination Date 04-12-19 )
Filed by Petitioner
04/12/2019 Declaration - Default FL170
Filed by Petitioner
04/12/2019 Declaration - Service of Preliminary Dec. of Disclosure
Filed by Respondent
04/12/2019 Appearance, Stipulations and Waivers
Filed by Petitioner
04/12/2019 Notice - Entry of Judgment
04/12/2019 Minute Order



Thanks Felicity