Arizona Child Custody Case

Desiree's notice that incompetent attorney, David L. Goldfarb, of Gillespie, Shields & Durant, would be representing her.

A copy of the 2002 order from the California court, granting Fox and Desiree joint legal and physical custody of their son.

Attempt to get "emergency" custody by falsely claiming Fox hid our son from me for 9 years, was in "prison", and was going to be deported upon his release from prison.

Denying request for ex party action; setting a hearing for the temporary custody request; appointing a best interest attorney for their son.

Appointing Timothy Nelson as Best Interest Attorney for Fox's and Desiree's son.

Desiree's second attempt to get a temporary custody order, and an order prohibiting Fox from having direct contact with their son. Desiree falsely alleged Fox was threatening to take their son back to his home state of California. Because this was an "ex parte" motion, Fox was not given the opportunity to appear or respond to Desiree's allegations.

Temporary order granting Desiree sole custody of their son, based solely on her false allegations Fox had hid their child from her for 9 years and was now threatening to go to Arizona and bring their child back to California.

Granting Desiree's request for emergency, temporary custody of their son.

Desiree attempted to obtain an order of protection against Fox, for herself and their son, in order to prevent Fox from having any contact with their son.

Order denying Desiree's petition for an order of protection against Fox.

Based on Arizona not having jurisdiction under the UCCJEA because California was the child's home state, and because the child was only in Arizona as a direct result of Desiree's misconduct.

Ordering Desiree to respond to Fox's Motion to Dismiss; for Fox to provide Desiree's attorney a copy of any documents filed by him in the California court; ordering Desiree to allow Fox to have telephone contact with their son; keeping the temporary custody order, Desiree having sole legal and physical, in place until the next hearing on November 26, 2011.

Arguing California was not their son's home state because Fox had been in custody in Arizona for the past 4 years. The argument was incredibly weak and shows the type of frivolousness you can expect from the type of hack attorneys Desiree hires.

Determining California to be their son's home state, and the court which shall have jurisdiction over the child custody matters.

Arguing that Desiree's claim that Arizona is the home state, because neither parent has been residing in California for the preceding 6 months was incorrect because the home state is based on where the child resides - not the parents. Regardless, this reply was moot because by the time it was filed, the Arizona and California courts had already determined California was the home state and would have jurisdiction.

Allegations that Fox was failing to comply with the court's orders, and requesting the court set an accelerated conference with the California court to determine the issue of jurisdiction. The pleading was moot, however, because the courts had already conferred and determined California had jurisdiction.

Setting a telephonic status conference for Desiree's Notice of Non-Compliance.

Informing the parties the Arizona and California courts had conferred and determined that California was the home state and would have jurisdiction in all matters relating to child custody.

By the time this was filed with the court it was moot because the courts had already determined California had jurisdiction in the child custody matters.

Vacating existing temporary custody orders and conceding jurisdiction to the California court; dismissing all pending matters - including the petition for dissolution of marriage even though that could have continued in the Arizona court.

Consolidating case FC2011-001201 (Desiree's petition for annulment of marriage) into this case; directing Desiree to proceed by default regarding the annulment.

Denying Desiree's Ex Parte Motion to Amend Court's Orders Dated May 20, 2015.

This is when Desiree moved in with James Pendleton's home in Sahuarita, AZ.

Notice, the hearing date is set for August 4, 2015 and Desiree filed her Petition for Order of Protection in the Sahuarita Municipal Court on July 21, 2015. Which means this action was still pending before the Maricopa County Superior Court when she filed the order of protection - which means, even without considering the pending action in the California court, the Sahuarita court again did not have jurisdiction to issue the order of protection because this case was still pending.

Assuming there are no questions of jurisdiction resulting from the fact that a Petition for Dissolution was already pending in the California court at the time this Petition for Annulment was filed in the Arizona court, then this effectively annuls Fox's and Desiree's marriage. However, that question of jurisdiction may still be raised, at any point, which could, potentially, invalidate this decree.