Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Custody Ruling Drawing Fire
The Lawrence Journal World ^ | December 12, 2005 | Ron Knox

Posted on 12/12/2005 4:41:04 AM PST by Mercat

Custody ruling drawing fire Judge rules in favor of mother even though father serving in Iraq

After filing for divorce last May, Marine Cpl. Levi Bradley wanted a say about which parent his 2-year-old son would live with.

When Bradley, who has lived in Pomona and Ottawa, was deployed for Iraq two months later, his family and legal team thought a federal law meant to protect military personnel from civil litigation would stave off proceedings until he got back.

Instead, on two different occasions, a Franklin County judge ruled that the law didn’t apply to Bradley, raising the eyebrows of attorneys and a high-ranking Kansas lawmaker.

......

Bradley is in Iraq and could not be reached for comment.

The Servicemember’s Civil Relief Act was signed into law in 2003, shielding military personnel in Iraq, Afghanistan or other war zones from civil lawsuits and evictions until they are back in the U.S. Judges, the law says, must postpone judgment for at least 90 days if the service member applies for the additional time.

Records show that the Marine and his mother, Starleen Bradley, had legal custody of the child when he was deployed. Amber Bradley, the Marine’s estranged wife, signed the arrangement.

Court records show that Levi Bradley asked in October to delay further proceedings, a month before the first child custody hearing was to begin. The application included a signed Marine Corps letter from his commanding officer in Iraq and his own testimony, as the law requires.

But in court Nov. 8, Judge James Smith ruled that the mother should receive custody of the child, saying that the Servicemember’s Civil Relief Act didn’t apply because the temporary action affected the child, not Bradley himself, transcripts show.

....

(Excerpt) Read more at 2.ljworld.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Foreign Affairs; Government; News/Current Events; US: Kansas
KEYWORDS: courts; custody; father; iraq; kansas; military; militaryfamilies
I'll be watching this and when the appellate court decides, I'll post that decision. Interesting that the maternal Grandma works in the court house. It didn't say whether it was a temporary order or a permanent order based on evidence. I'll call Jean Ann and ask her.
1 posted on 12/12/2005 4:41:05 AM PST by Mercat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Mercat

Pomona is just down the road a few miles from where I live. I will be interested in hearing what transpires on this case.


2 posted on 12/12/2005 4:54:22 AM PST by GarySpFc (De Oppresso Liber)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mercat
Sharp works in the clerk’s office of the Franklin County courthouse with Smith.

Maternal grandmother works with the judge. There's your answer to the ruling.

3 posted on 12/12/2005 4:57:45 AM PST by mtbopfuyn (Legality does not dictate morality... Lavin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mercat

Join the Marines.
See the world.
Lose custody of your kids.

Sad and wrong.


4 posted on 12/12/2005 5:00:36 AM PST by MaryFromMichigan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mercat
. . . saying that the Servicemember’s Civil Relief Act didn’t apply because the temporary action affected the child, not Bradley himself . . .

That's like saying that having your car stolen affects the car, not you. The judge must be trying for a position on the Ninth...

5 posted on 12/12/2005 5:02:59 AM PST by trebb ("I am the way... no one comes to the Father, but by me..." - Jesus in John 14:6 (RSV))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mercat

The judge is probably correct. The child should have had an attorney.


6 posted on 12/12/2005 5:08:59 AM PST by Raycpa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mercat

"Marine Cpl. Levi Bradley wanted a say about which parent his 2-year-old son would live with"

I think most fathers would like a say about which parent their kids live with........doesn't mean they get it.

I see a divorce story, not so much a military story.


7 posted on 12/12/2005 5:23:45 AM PST by RFEngineer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RFEngineer
There are several inaccuracies in this story.

The Soldiers and Sailors Civil Relief Act dates from WW2. It was amended in 2003 by the Uniformed Services Employment and Re-enployment Act.

The SSCR forbids civil suits while a service member is deployed. The 90 day extension is for after they get back.

It is possible that this "judge" thought that since it was the SOLDIERS and SAILORS Civil Relief Act it did not apply to Marines.
8 posted on 12/12/2005 5:51:55 AM PST by fireforeffect (A kind word and a 2x4, gets you more than just a kind word.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: trebb
Your analogy is in error ~ laws concerning child custody are NOT the same as those relating to possession of property. The kiddies are not property after all.

Although the judge would seem to have a really serious conflict of interest in this case, the child in question has his or her own rights. A different judge may well rule the same way inasmuch as the custodial parent (the Marine) sought to leave the child in the custody of a non-relative (his girlfriend).

9 posted on 12/12/2005 6:05:38 AM PST by muawiyah (u)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson