Petition for Modification of
Final Order
(Grandparents' Visitation)
Back to Family Law Legal Forms
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF CLAY COUNTY, WEST VIRGINIA
JAMES BROWN and
JAN BROWN, his wife,
Petitioners,
VS. CIVIL ACTION NO. 90-C-1
DAVID HALL,
Respondent.
PETITION FOR MODIFICATION OF FINAL ORDER
Come now the Petitioners, JAMES BROWN and JAN BROWN, his wife, by their attorney, James Wilson Douglas, pursuant to West Virginia Code 48-2-15(b)(1) and 48-2B-1 et seq., and in and for their Petition For Modification of Final Order, does aver, depose and say:
I
That the Petitioners are residents of South Carolina, and they receive their mail at 7 East Main Street, Sanford, South Carolina 27770.
II
That Respondent, David Hall, is a resident of Clay County, West Virginia, and Respondent is currently domiciled, and receives his mail at, Box 1, Green Knob, Maysel, West Virginia 25133 and General Delivery, Clay, West Virginia 25043, respectively.
III
That the daughter of said Petitioners, one Lynn Hall, who was and is also a resident of South Carolina, and the Respondent were formerly husband and wife, whose bonds of matrimony were legally dissolved by Decree of the Circuit Court of Clay County, West Virginia, entered on or about the 1st day of December, 1989.
IV
That the said Lynn Hall and the Respondent are the natural parents of two infants, to-wit: Aron Hall, born November 29, 1984, age seven (7); and Janae Hall, born December 14, 1987, age four (4), who currently reside with and were awarded to their father, the Respondent herein, by the force of the aforesaid December 1, 1989 Order.
V
That aside from filing a pro se, form answer, provided by the office of the Circuit Clerk, wherein the said Lynn Hall admitted irreconcilable differences to a like allegation contained in Respondent's Divorce Complaint, the said Lynn Hall, an indigent without the services of an attorney, did not otherwise appear and defend the aforesaid cause of action within the meaning of West Virginia Code 48-2-15(b)(1)(B).
VI
That although the aforesaid December 1, 1989 Order granted the said Lynn Hall reasonable visitation rights with the infant children born of the parties hereto, as set forth in the aforesaid Order, a subsequent April 1991 Modification Order reduced, curtailed and circumscribed the said Lynn Hall's rights of visitation, which alterations included, inter alia., (a) supervised association with said infants; (b) limitation of visitation to the (West Virginia) residence of the Respondent; and (c) restriction of visitation to the natural mother only.
VII
That the Petitioners are related by blood to the aforesaid infants through the said Lynn Hall, who was a party to the original action in divorce; to-wit: maternal grandparents.
VIII
That the Petitioners own their own home, are both gainfully employed, readily accept responsibility, observe moral principles and exhibit strong family ties and an affectionate awareness of kinship.
IX
That the Petitioners aver that a material change of circumstances, not in contemplation of the parties at the time of the entry of the aforesaid divorce decree, warrants an alteration of the aforesaid Order, originally entered in said matter, said changed circumstances being that subsequent to the entry of said divorce decree, certain events have occurred with respect to the grounds envisioned by West Virginia Code 48-2B-1 et seq.; to-wit: the removing parent, the Petitioners' former son-in-law, has refused the Petitioners' any visitation with said children.
X
That a modification of the aforesaid divorce decree adopting, incorporating and applying a maternal grandparent visitation schedule, superseding the present provisions regarding visitation, would: aggrandize the best interests and advance the general welfare of the aforesaid infants, foster the infants' appreciation and acquaintance with branches of their maternal family; renew and strengthen former familial connections and relationships, lessen the domestic disruption attendant upon the former divorce action and subsequent proceedings, and provide an aspect of predictability heretofore absent or lacking in the original visitation scheme.
XI
That the modification hereby sought will promote the general welfare of said infants and otherwise will be to their material benefit; and the relief hereinafter prayed for will work no substantial injury to any party hereto.
PRAYER
WHEREFORE, Petitioners pray that this Honorable Court modify the December 1, 1989 Order, formerly entered in this action, and all subsequent orders thereunto pertaining, to provide the Petitioners, and each of them, grandparent visitation with said infants for two (2) non-consecutive three (3) week periods during the summer season, between June 1st and September 1st of any given year, which visitation shall be executed at Petitioners' sole expense, which includes transportation to and from the residence of the custodial Respondent; and that Petitioners be granted such other and further relief as this Honorable Court may deem equitable, proper, just, and in the premises, meet, they will ever pray, etc.
JAMES BROWN and
JAN BROWN, his wife
By Counsel
________________________
JAMES WILSON DOUGLAS
Attorney at Law
100 North Hill Road
Sutton, West Virginia 26601
Counsel for Petitioner