Bethenny & Jason: The Divorce Showdown

[film noire]

3 hours ago, Mrs peel said:

Unless the petition to change custody did NOT claim a substantial change in circumstances, the Court is actually obligated to hold a hearing.  That's what's happening here.  The court delayed things a bit by ordering the evaluations, etc., but unless B withdraws her petition, there will be a hearing. THAT'S when the court will decide whether her case has merit.  Not before.  Nothing that's happened so far is any indication of how the Court will decide. 

Okay, that makes more sense out of the judge encouraging them to arrive at a custody agreement before the next hearing in March - nothing has been decided yet, and the hearing will determine if there's an actual custody trial.

One question, counselor:  If the court ordered evaluations show danger to a child from either parent, do judges still encourage parents to work out a custody agreement outside of court? 

2 hours ago, Alonzo Mosely FBI said:

Leaving NYC on the weekends to chill out sounds perfectly fine to me! 

Me, too  (and jesus, after this miserably humid and mean-weathered NYC summer, I'd spend friggin' time with the Hoppys in Hazleton - "A kiddy pool? LOVE IT! Can we take a day trip to Philly? HOORAY! Is that an actual DEER?? OMG!")

Edited August 20, 2018 by film noire
simplify my damn question

[AnnA]

22 minutes ago, film noire said:

 

Me, too  (and jesus, after this miserably humid and mean-weathered NYC summer, I'd spend friggin' time with the Hoppys in Hazleton - "A kiddy pool? LOVE IT! Can we take a day trip to Philly? HOORAY! Is that an actual DEER?? OMG!")

 

Have you ever spent a summer on Long Island?  I'd much rather have access to the beach and a real pool in the yard (Hamptons) than a kiddy pool. 

I enjoyed my visit to Philadelphia but I was an adult and could appreciate the history. 

A deer?    There are actual deer on Long Island too.  

When Bryn visits Jason and his parents does he allow her to bring her dogs?

Edited August 20, 2018 by AnnA

[film noire]

2 minutes ago, AnnA said:

Have you ever spent a summer on Long Island?  I'd rather have access to the beach and a real pool in the yard (Hamptons)

I enjoyed my visit to Philadelphia but I was an adult and could appreciate the history. 

A deer?    There are actual deer on Long Island too.  

 

 

; )

Edited August 20, 2018 by film noire

[AnnA]

4 minutes ago, film noire said:

 

 

; )

 

[Natalie68]

16 minutes ago, film noire said:

 

 

; )

I don't know about y'all but I am dying to say this sometime.  It just cracks me up!  

[AnnA]

1 minute ago, Natalie68 said:

I don't know about y'all but I am dying to say this sometime.  It just cracks me up!  

Me too!  

And if I'm really lucky, I'll be able to duplicate Bethenny's "BooYah Bitch" one day too.   

[breezy424]

1 hour ago, Celia Rubenstein said:

According to the article linked a few pages back, the court has set a trial date, not a hearing date. Which means the court has apparently already held the hearings you describe and determined there is merit to B's case. 

 

Judges are human and they form opinions of the people in front of them just like anyone else does. Ideally they are able to set those opinions aside when they rule, but we don't live in an ideal world.

And I don't believe a judge is required to rule/warn a party not to make any more frivolous motions before they nail them for it. I believe they can zotz you for it whenever you do it, even the first time. 

Actually, the court set a hearing date.  It's at the bottom of the article:

https://pagesix.com/2018/08/16/bethenny-frankels-ex-questions-her-parental-judgment-after-dennis-shields-death/

[Celia Rubenstein]

That article says the judge set a "hearing to determine custody" which makes no sense. A trial is the mechanism by which custody is determined. So I don't put a lot of stock in that report.

Not that ROL or Taste of Reality are much more reliable, but they both described the judge as setting a trial date in March. 

ETA i decided to dig a little deeper and found an interesting E news story online that calls the next event a hearing a few times, but then ends saying Bethenny got the trial she was asking for. LOL I wish tmz had a report. They usually get the legalities right. I'm gonna wait until someone actually reads the docket and posts about what is on it. It's too hard to get it right based on reporters who don't understand procedure! 

Edited August 20, 2018 by Celia Rubenstein

[Gem 10]

6 hours ago, FozzyBear said:

I don’t know nearly enough about family court to say anything useful about the court battle.

i think Bethany and Jason were always going to be a toxic mess. They are both people who want things they way they want them. My guess is if the pregnancy hadn’t happened so fast they would have hit a first big fight and broken up. To be honest I thought they were both sort of using each other, not intentionally, but all the same. I think Bethany liked the idea of Jason’s hometown boy thing and I think Jason liked the idea of Bethany’s glamorous TV star thing. They liked the idea. Neither one liked having to make any scarafices for what they both willingly signed up for. Bethany didn’t actually want to spend every weekend with Jason’s family (reasonable) and Jason didn’t want to move to LA for the talk show (reasonable). Neither was really right or wrong, but at the end of the day neither one really loved the other enough to get past how they wanted things to be. I’ve always thought they were like so many shotgun marriages. After the excitement of the whirlwind romance and new baby wore off they didn’t actually have a deep love for each other.

Right.  I don’t believe for one minute that they were supposed to go to Hazelton every weekend.  That would be insane to expect a working couple just married to hog up their time every weekend.  A young couple need down time,  socialize with friends, do chores, etc.  What really got me was the “ I love yous” they were both saying to each other every five minutes.  That love that lasted a good six months was bullshit.  Bethenny wanted a baby, Jason was a decent guy, so Bingo.  She got what she wanted, got her business rolling and dumped him.  The guy was duped and knew it, therefore giving her a very hard time and not making it easy for her regarding the apartment, Bryn and everything.  That’s the way I see it anyhow.  Everyone has their opinion.  Jason is not the type to be used, and that is what’s eating her up.  All this aside, I still love her on t.v. and just wish that they could have Bryn 50-50.  That would be the right thing to do to make everyone happy.  Ten more years goes fast. The only people making out on this situation are the lawyers.  They must be dancing in the streets, buying new cars, going to Hawaii, etc.

Edited August 21, 2018 by Gem 10

[AnnA]

11 minutes ago, Gem 10 said:

Right.  I don’t believe for one minute that they were supposed to go to Hazelton every weekend.  That would be insane to expect a working couple just married to hog up their time every weekend.  A young couple need down time,  socialize with friends, do chores, etc.  What really got me was the “ I love yous” they were both saying to each other every five minutes.  That love that lasted a good six months was bullshit.  Bethenny wanted a baby, Jason was a decent guy, so Bingo.  She got what she wanted, got her business rolling and dumped him.  The guy was duped and knew it, therefore giving her a very hard time and not making it easy for her regarding the apartment, Bryn and everything.  That’s the way I see it anyhow.  Everyone has their opinion.

I read that Jason wanted to go every other weekend which I think is way too often. 

I think  Jason is as much of a control freak as Bethenny is and if that's true, the marriage was doomed.  

We can just agree to disagree. 

Edited August 21, 2018 by AnnA

[Gem 10]

4 minutes ago, AnnA said:

I read that Jason wanted to go every other weekend which I think is way too often. 

I think  Jason is as much of a control freak as Bethenny is and if that's true, the marriage was doomed.  

We can just agree to disagree. 

I read that Jason wanted to go every other weekend which I think is way too often. 

I think  Jason is as much of a control freak as Bethenny is and if that's true, the marriage was doomed.  

We can just agree to disagree. 

Agreed, and I didn’t finish my post, which is up one on thread which I edited.  Thank you.

[QuinnM]

20 minutes ago, Gem 10 said:

Right.  I don’t believe for one minute that they were supposed to go to Hazelton every weekend.  That would be insane to expect a working couple just married to hog up their time every weekend.  A young couple need down time,  socialize with friends, do chores, etc

But that is EXACTLY what Jason wanted.  He offered his parents coming down to NYC every other weekend and them going to PA every other weekend.  Then he said that he and Brynn would go every weekend and Bethenny could just stay and go out with her friends if she thought that was so important.  This was on BEA.  He said it.  Every weekend.

[Rap541]

14 minutes ago, AnnA said:

I read that Jason wanted to go every other weekend which I think is way too often. 

Technically when the argument occurred, Jason was actually insisting that they go to Hazelton *every* weekend and when Bethenny balked, he noted that he and Bryn would go alone. 

The only reason we're discussing every other weekend is because Jason currently has custody of Bryn every other weekend and since he was so emphatic about going, I am genuinely curious if he loads Bryn in the car and takes her for the weekend every time he has her for custody. 

[AnnA]

43 minutes ago, Gem 10 said:

Agreed, and I didn’t finish my post, which is up one on thread which I edited.  Thank you.

I saw that.   I can't even find the words to express how much I hate the 50-50.  Although  I think a child should spend time with both parents and both parents should have a say on their education, religion, medical care, etc.,  they should have only one home.  Living in two homes is not normal.   There are three classifications of custody in NY state.   Two of them have sole physical custody and the third is joint like they have now.     When Bryn fills out paperwork for a library card which address should she use?   What about having sleepovers?   Do you think her girlfriends' parents want their daughters sleeping over at Jason's?   Let's not forget he was arrested for stalking and Bethenny had a restraining order against him.   Does Bryn get to bring her dogs with her to Jason's house?  These things don't matter if Bryn stays over on visits but they sure as hell matter if she lives half her life there.

Edited August 21, 2018 by AnnA

[biakbiak]

26 minutes ago, AnnA said:

When Bryn fills out paperwork for a library card which address should she use?   What about having sleepovers?  

She’s 8 so she only has a joint card with whatever parent she went with when she got it. I have had a library card as long as I can remember and I don’t remeber ever getting mail unless I signed up for the Friends of the Library mailing list. Eight year olds don’t get a lot of snail mail but I imagine both Jason and Bethenny hold onto it until she’s home.

I really don’t understand the sleepover thing, if she is having one when she is at Jason’s the girls go to Jason’s and if it’s when she is a B’s they go there. I have friends who have this arrangement and their kids have never had a problem having sleepovers. If parents have an issue with Jason because of his actions that is one thing but that has nothing to do with the 50/50 split.

Edited August 21, 2018 by biakbiak

[AnnA]

OK the library card was a bad example.   Bryn will have to fill out any number of forms with her name and address.   IMHO She should have only one address.

[biakbiak]

3 minutes ago, AnnA said:

OK the library card was a bad example.   Bryn will have to fill out any number of forms with her name and address.   IMHO She should have only one address.

Perhaps she will choose an address for all her forms to make it easier for her but that’s a long way off and not as important anymore because so much is done by email. I imagine currently whatever parent is filling out the form uses their address. Maybe she can get a P.O. Box.

Edited August 21, 2018 by biakbiak

[Rap541]

17 minutes ago, biakbiak said:

I really don’t understand the sleepover thing, if she is having one when she is at Jason’s the girls go to Jason’s and if it’s when she is a B’s they go there.

Respectfully, because I in no way have any concerns or fears about Jason Hoppy in this respect, I know a lot of parents who will not allow their prepubescent daughters to attend a sleep over at a home where the only adult present is a single heterosexual adult male. And frankly, I know a lot of single dads who will not have sleep overs at their home because it's not worth the risk of an accusation. 

[WhoaWhoKnew]

9 minutes ago, AnnA said:

OK the library card was a bad example.   Bryn will have to fill out any number of forms with her name and address.   IMHO She should have only one address.

In just a few years I suspect she'll have only one address when she gets more input on who she wants to live with all the time.

[biakbiak]

1 minute ago, Rap541 said:

Respectfully, because I in no way have any concerns or fears about Jason Hoppy in this respect, I know a lot of parents who will not allow their prepubescent daughters to attend a sleep over at a home where the only adult present is a single heterosexual adult male. And frankly, I know a lot of single dads who will not have sleep overs at their home because it's not worth the risk of an accusation. 

It’s not been an issue with my single father friends but everyone’s different. However, we know nothing about Jason’s personal life perhaps he has a girlfriend.

My friends with kids have also mentioned that it seems like their are fewer sleepovers than when we were kids so maybe Brynn doesn’t have any anywhere.

[film noire]

1 hour ago, AnnA said:

What about having sleepovers?   Do you think her girlfriends' parents want their daughters sleeping over at Jason's?   Let's not forget he was arrested for stalking and Bethenny had a restraining order against him.   

The so-called  "stalking" charges against Hoppy disappeared into thin air when it came time to prove them --  Hoppy ended up with no jail time, no long term probation, no mandated therapy, no guilty plea, and his record erased within six months. The prosecutor offered everything but a happy ending massage to make the case go away.

I'd weigh that outcome against Frankel's own questionable judgement (encouraging her child to socialize with a credibly accused rapist, and a man who just sadly and horribly overdosed on a drug cocktail) and I'd be hard pressed to put my kid in either house. I'd have Bryn come to us instead -- problem solved ; )

Edited August 21, 2018 by film noire

[Mrs peel]

6 hours ago, Celia Rubenstein said:

According to the article linked a few pages back, the court has set a trial date, not a hearing date. Which means the court has apparently already held the hearings you describe and determined there is merit to B's case. 

 

Judges are human and they form opinions of the people in front of them just like anyone else does. Ideally they are able to set those opinions aside when they rule, but we don't live in an ideal world.

And I don't believe a judge is required to rule/warn a party not to make any more frivolous motions before they nail them for it. I believe they can zotz you for it whenever you do it, even the first time. 

Sorry, I use trial and hearing interchangeably.  Judges are human, and they sometimes let their personal bias interfere, but there is extensive case law to guide them in their decision-making. 

Judges actually have VERY limited ability to tell a litigant they can’t file a motion.  Sorry, it’s extremely rare.  I was shocked to read another poster say she knew of a case where a judge did it after 3 motions.  The only case I know of in Cook acountybinvolved a litigant hpwho had filed dozens of baseless motions.  Americans are entitled to access to the courts, it’s one of our basic rights.

edited to add, in the Como County case, I believe the judge didn’t order the litigant to not file motions, he ordered the court clerk to not accept them.  A subtle difference.

Edited August 21, 2018 by Mrs peel

[Mrs peel]

5 hours ago, film noire said:

Okay, that makes more sense out of the judge encouraging them to arrive at a custody agreement before the next hearing in March - nothing has been decided yet, and the hearing will determine if there's an actual custody trial.

One question, counselor:  If the court ordered evaluations show danger to a child from either parent, do judges still encourage parents to work out a custody agreement outside of court? 

Me, too  (and jesus, after this miserably humid and mean-weathered NYC summer, I'd spend friggin' time with the Hoppys in Hazleton - "A kiddy pool? LOVE IT! Can we take a day trip to Philly? HOORAY! Is that an actual DEER?? OMG!")

As Celia Rubenstein pointed out, I used hearing and trial interchangeably.  I think March 2019 is the trial/hearing date for the parties to present witnesses and evidence for the court to make a ruling on B’s petition.

if the evaluations showed danger to the child, one of the parties undoubtedly would have filed an emergency petition to change custody or the visitation schedule.  And no the court wouldn’t encourage a settlement.

[breezy424]

4 hours ago, Celia Rubenstein said:

That article says the judge set a "hearing to determine custody" which makes no sense. A trial is the mechanism by which custody is determined. So I don't put a lot of stock in that report.

Not that ROL or Taste of Reality are much more reliable, but they both described the judge as setting a trial date in March. 

ETA i decided to dig a little deeper and found an interesting E news story online that calls the next event a hearing a few times, but then ends saying Bethenny got the trial she was asking for. LOL I wish tmz had a report. They usually get the legalities right. I'm gonna wait until someone actually reads the docket and posts about what is on it. It's too hard to get it right based on reporters who don't understand procedure! 

I'm just saying that the article you referenced didn't say 'trial'.  It said hearing. 

[Celia Rubenstein]

21 minutes ago, Mrs peel said:

Sorry, I use trial and hearing interchangeably.  Judges are human, and they sometimes let their personal bias interfere, but there is extensive case law to guide them in their decision-making. 

Of course case law is important because it establishes legal precedent which the court is bound by.  But when it comes to a judge simply deciding who they believe or who to trust, that is when bias can have a real effect. That is the type of thing I was suggesting might happen. Jason hurt his credibility (or should I say, his lawyer hurt his credibility) by bursting out with a bunch of nasty insinuations about Bethenny after initially indicating he was fine with the current custody arrangement.  Because if Jason really thought Bethenny was exposing Bryn to dangerous people, he should have not concealed his concerns until he needed them to bolster his argument. He should have put Bryn's safety first and voiced his concerns at the outset. Not saved them up to try to gain a legal advantage after an unfavorable ruling.

 

1 minute ago, breezy424 said:

I'm just saying that the article you referenced didn't say 'trial'.  It said hearing. 

I wasn't referencing the Page Six story. I was referring to the link to Radar Online Suprsuprelevated brought over here that used the word "trial." 

[breezy424]

9 minutes ago, Celia Rubenstein said:

Of course case law is important because it establishes legal precedent which the court is bound by.  But when it comes to a judge simply deciding who they believe or who to trust, that is when bias can have a real effect. That is the type of thing I was suggesting might happen. Jason hurt his credibility (or should I say, his lawyer hurt his credibility) by bursting out with a bunch of nasty insinuations about Bethenny after initially indicating he was fine with the current custody arrangement.  Because if Jason really thought Bethenny was exposing Bryn to dangerous people, he should have not concealed his concerns until he needed them to bolster his argument. He should have put Bryn's safety first and voiced his concerns at the outset. Not saved them up to try to gain a legal advantage after an unfavorable ruling.

 

I wasn't referencing the Page Six story. I was referring to the link to Radar Online Suprsuprelevated brought over here that used the word "trial." 

Whatever.  The only link that I saw in this thread was a link Quinn referenced and that was the Page Six story on Thursday.  Done with discussing.  The only thing I know for sure is that the judge doesn't believe Bryn is in any danger from either parent at this point.  It will be over a year since Beth originally filed the motion and nothing has happened to change the custody terms.

[Celia Rubenstein]

7 minutes ago, breezy424 said:

Whatever.  The only link that I saw in this thread was a link Quinn referenced and that was the Page Six story on Thursday.  Done with discussing.  The only thing I know for sure is that the judge doesn't believe Bryn is in any danger from either parent at this point.  It will be over a year since Beth originally filed the motion and nothing has happened to change the custody terms.

 

This is what I was referring to. It's kind of tiny, you might have missed it

On 8/19/2018 at 5:23 AM, SuprSuprElevated said:

Brought over from the _____________ thread.  (God what I wouldn't give for short-term memory, lol)

I realize that Jason wanted the court to dismiss her petition, but to call this a win seems a bit of a stretch.  I guess it's a battle win in what is now a protracted war.

Nobody wins.  Least of all the 8-yr old pawn kid

 

I don't think Bethenny's motion has anything to do with Bryn being in danger or else it would have been resolved by now.  I suspect it has more to do with Jason simply being difficult for no damn reason and shifting custody will alleviate the stress he is creating.  Bryn is getting older and she is more aware of any drama that he may needlessly be creating about where she goes and what she does.

His refusal to allow Bryn an extra day with with Bethenny so she could be told about Dennis dying is a perfect example of how he is just being an ass and can't put Bryn first if it means missing a chance to punish Bethenny. What a crummy move that was.  If he could be that cold hearted at such a serious time, I can only imagine how petty he is on a day to day basis.  Bryn shouldn't be collateral damage in his little war against Bethenny, and I suspect this requested custody change is Beth's attempt to put a stop to it.

[film noire]

Thank you for the info, @Mrs peel!

2 hours ago, breezy424 said:

The only thing I know for sure is that the judge doesn't believe Bryn is in any danger from either parent at this point. 

Right -- the judge has seen the report,  and it doesn't indict either parent (or else he wouldn't urge them to reach a settlement by themselves). So it's not about Bryn;  she's happy and healthy. It's about the parents acting like a couple of punks whenever they have to negotiate Bryn's schedule. 

Whatever that child is made of that has enabled her to somehow withstand being warped by this endless custody battle -- unicorn hearts and pure steel? -- they don't deserve her. There are people who would kill for their child to be this stable after a "normal" divorce, never mind this pointless shit show.

Edited August 21, 2018 by film noire

[hottesthw]

4 hours ago, QuinnM said:

But that is EXACTLY what Jason wanted.  He offered his parents coming down to NYC every other weekend and them going to PA every other weekend.  Then he said that he and Brynn would go every weekend and Bethenny could just stay and go out with her friends if she thought that was so important.  This was on BEA.  He said it.  Every weekend.

That was when Brynn was a newborn and also when B actually still pretended to like his family and also act like she wanted a normal family herself. It's not that far fetched to think as time went on the weekly visits would end. I've had plenty of friends and family have kids and the first few months I saw them constantly. Every Sunday at the grandparents for dinner at 3pm. And then months go by and it's monthly dinners, and then months later it's "see you on a Halloween!" To hold Jason to the fire now for something he wanted to do with his first and only brand new baby years ago is silly IMO.

[hottesthw]

3 hours ago, AnnA said:

I saw that.   I can't even find the words to express how much I hate the 50-50.  Although  I think a child should spend time with both parents and both parents should have a say on their education, religion, medical care, etc.,  they should have only one home.  Living in two homes is not normal.   There are three classifications of custody in NY state.   Two of them have sole physical custody and the third is joint like they have now.     When Bryn fills out paperwork for a library card which address should she use?   What about having sleepovers?   Do you think her girlfriends' parents want their daughters sleeping over at Jason's?   Let's not forget he was arrested for stalking and Bethenny had a restraining order against him.   Does Bryn get to bring her dogs with her to Jason's house?  These things don't matter if Bryn stays over on visits but they sure as hell matter if she lives half her life there.

You are making it much more complicated than it is and has to be. She will go to school (a school both parents deem acceptable), and most likely whatever parent lives in the district or closest, she will use that address. If she goes to a library with her dad, she will use his address. If she goes to one near her mom's house, she will use her address. Whoever pays for the health insurance will have their address listed on file with the pediatrician office. Etc etc. Its not all that hard to figure out. When she decides she wants her friends to sleep over, they'll go wherever Brynn is, it won't matter which parents house she is at because Brynn and her friends should be welcome at both parents homes. The dogs live where they live. They don't follow the kid around. Maybe she has a dog at each parents house so she gets a big sloppy puppy kiss each time she returns. 

Millions of kids live a 50/50 life and it actually works quite well because they grow up grounded with both mom and dad a constant in their lives and involved in everything (homework etc). Versus a kid going a week a time without seeing her dad and only getting a few short days with him.

[Rap541]

Does this apply to everyone involved? Or just Jason? If anyone said something a few years ago, that was dumb or that they didn't actually follow up on, we should forgive and forget? Does anyone include, you know, Bethenny? Because if Bethenny is still on the hook for statements made years ago, then I don't understand why we all need to be so understanding if Jason really isn't committed to taking his child on a three hour drive EVERY weekend he has her because he is that committed to making sure he spends every weekend he's physically capable taking his daughter to Hzaelton PA to enjoy the love of a REAL family. 

[FozzyBear]

As I have said, I know very little about family court. But regarding things like which address to use on forms, is this what the legal vs physical custody is for? Is legal custody your official legal residence even though you may spend 50% of your time with the other parent? Most of my friends to which this matters have 50/50 or close to it custody and it always seemed like they used whichever address was more convenient to what they were doing (like if one parent lives in a better school district or something), but that could just be my perception. It may be much more involved then that.

In any case, I think 50/50 custody is totally do-able if the parents are willing to communicate and put their love for their children before their hatred for each other...so Bryn is pretty screwed here.

[Mrs peel]

2 hours ago, film noire said:

Thank you for the info, @Mrs peel!

Right -- the judge has seen the report,  and it doesn't indict either parent (or else he wouldn't urge them to reach a settlement by themselves). So it's not about Bryn;  she's happy and healthy. It's about the parents acting like a couple of punks whenever they have to negotiate Bryn's schedule. 

Whatever that child is made of that has enabled her to somehow withstand being warped by this endless custody battle -- unicorn hearts and pure steel? -- they don't deserve her. There are people who would kill for their child to be this stable after a "normal" divorce, never mind this pointless shit show.

That the evaluation probably doesn’t say there is any imminent danger to Bryan doesn’t mean the petition isn’t about her.  I’m suspicious of B’s petition, but the evaluation is just a tool for the use of the Court.  It could well be the evaluation indicates something pro or con about either parent and Bryn’s interactions with him or her.  We won’t know until and unless the evaluation is entered into the record.

bryn likely doesn’t know much about the actions in court.  Even the evaluation, it’s not like she was told it was for a custody petition.  Certainly neither parent should be informing her about the custody battle (not that it doesn’t happen, I’ve seen brainwashed children in court.  It ain’t pretty and sometimes it backfires).

[Mrs peel]

1 hour ago, FozzyBear said:

As I have said, I know very little about family court. But regarding things like which address to use on forms, is this what the legal vs physical custody is for? Is legal custody your official legal residence even though you may spend 50% of your time with the other parent? Most of my friends to which this matters have 50/50 or close to it custody and it always seemed like they used whichever address was more convenient to what they were doing (like if one parent lives in a better school district or something), but that could just be my perception. It may be much more involved then that.

In any case, I think 50/50 custody is totally do-able if the parents are willing to communicate and put their love for their children before their hatred for each other...so Bryn is pretty screwed here.

Apparently NY doesn’t use the term “legal” custody.  For decision making, it’s either sole or joint custody.  In the first former, the parent with sole custody makes all the major decisions, the latter the parents must agree.  For where the child lives, there can be a “primary residential” parent, where the other parent has visitation.  Or the parents can split the residential time in a multitude of ways.  Others have indicated that, at the moment, B and Jason split the time pretty evenly.

B seems to be seeking sole custody, where she wouldn’t have to consult with Jason on decisions.  She’s also likely seeking to change the visitation to limit him more.

i do wonder what the Court would do about Bryn’s religious upbringing.  The parents agreed she would be Catholic I believe, but B is not that.  If she has sole custody, the court might well still require a Catholic upbringing.

[Alonzo Mosely FBI]

6 hours ago, Celia Rubenstein said:

 

His refusal to allow Bryn an extra day with with Bethenny so she could be told about Dennis dying 

I hadn't heard this one, when was this reported?

[Higgins]

7 hours ago, Celia Rubenstein said:

Of course case law is important because it establishes legal precedent which the court is bound by.  But when it comes to a judge simply deciding who they believe or who to trust, that is when bias can have a real effect. That is the type of thing I was suggesting might happen. Jason hurt his credibility (or should I say, his lawyer hurt his credibility) by bursting out with a bunch of nasty insinuations about Bethenny after initially indicating he was fine with the current custody arrangement.  Because if Jason really thought Bethenny was exposing Bryn to dangerous people, he should have not concealed his concerns until he needed them to bolster his argument. He should have put Bryn's safety first and voiced his concerns at the outset. Not saved them up to try to gain a legal advantage after an unfavorable ruling.

 

I wasn't referencing the Page Six story. I was referring to the link to Radar Online Suprsuprelevated brought over here that used the word "trial." 

Judges are not bound by precedence . They give precedence great respect and consideration but not bound.

[QuinnM]

1 hour ago, Alonzo Mosely FBI said:

I hadn't heard this one, when was this reported

This was the first gossip rag article on the custody hearing.  Her attorney responded with this when Jason’s attorney started lobbing grenades.

[ryebread]

7 hours ago, film noire said:

Whatever that child is made of that has enabled her to somehow withstand being warped by this endless custody battle -- unicorn hearts and pure steel? -- they don't deserve her. There are people who would kill for their child to be this stable after a "normal" divorce, never mind this pointless shit show.

So true.

And there are people who would kill to have a child, period.  People who would cherish any child if they were only lucky enough to have one. Who would put that child first and not pull this shit if there was an unfortunate split.

Makes me sick. There's a side of me that wishes we could have all the details of how it got this way. Because I seriously can't wrap my brain around why they can't act like grown-ups and stop doing this to their kid.  SMDH.

[ShawnaLanne]

42 minutes ago, ryebread said:

So true.

And there are people who would kill to have a child, period.  People who would cherish any child if they were only lucky enough to have one. Who would put that child first and not pull this shit if there was an unfortunate split.

Makes me sick. There's a side of me that wishes we could have all the details of how it got this way. Because I seriously can't wrap my brain around why they can't act like grown-ups and stop doing this to their kid.  SMDH.

I can't fathom how they manage to keep up the hate for each other. Hating someone is time consuming and soul sucking. One or both of them have to keep stoking those fires.

Now we know who I really think is doing it. But it's probably both of them.

Edited August 21, 2018 by ShawnaLanne

[ladle]

I mean, again, I think both "sides" are right here.  I think Bethenny is a deeply-flawed human who did not have healthy relationships modeled for her as a child and who possibly will never be able to have a "normal" romantic relationship that does not implode (See: Ramona in that bridge scene).  On the other hand I don't think Jason was some altruist who was just trying to give her stability.  I remember one episode of their show, when Bethenny said she doesn't like to have big birthday parties - that it's too close to her own mom's birthday and it brings up bad memories for her, and she'd prefer to do something small.  Then Jason went out of his way to plan her this lavish birthday event, even invited his parents, etc.  I think she ended up crying in the bathroom?  At the time, some people interpreted this as "What a bitch - she didn't even appreciate this nice gesture!"  My interpretation was more along the lines of: "She told him this was a thing that would trigger her, and he did it anyway, and when she got upset, he lectured her."  I do remember thinking at the time that he frequently gaslighted (gaslit?) her by telling her whatever he wanted to do was "normal" behavior, thus exploiting her insecurities about her childhood. 

Also it should be noted that she did successfully get a restraining order against him.  I'm not sure courts hand those out willy nilly.  I believe there was evidence he was stalking her, and some of those messages from him were disturbing.  

Again, I say all of this as someone who doesn't even like Bethenny.  It's possible that if Jason were a great guy, she'd be acting exactly as she is now.  But I don't think he's a great guy. 

[Guest]

1) From Radar-on-Line

2) Take with grain of salt

3) My apologies if already mentioned

https://radaronline.com/exclusives/2018/08/bethenny-frankel-jason-hoppy-custody-battle-court-expert-forensic-daughter/

[Mrs peel]

2 hours ago, Higgins said:

Judges are not bound by precedence . They give precedence great respect and consideration but not bound.

Actually, they are.  Now it’s incredibly rare that a custody case presents exactly the same facts as a prior case, but judges are not free to ignore the decisions of a higher court.  They get overturned, IF the losing party has the ability to appeal.

[Higgins]

1 minute ago, Mrs peel said:

Actually, they are.  Now it’s incredibly rare that a custody case presents exactly the same facts as a prior case, but judges are not free to ignore the decisions of a higher court.  They get overturned, IF the losing party has the ability to appeal.

If judges were "bound" by precedence no cases would be overturned. 

[Mrs peel]

27 minutes ago, artisto said:

1) From Radar-on-Line

2) Take with grain of salt

3) My apologies if already mentioned

https://radaronline.com/exclusives/2018/08/bethenny-frankel-jason-hoppy-custody-battle-court-expert-forensic-daughter/

Thanks for that.  FYI, the Court didn’t ask the evaluator to “decide” whether the custody order should be changed, that’s a decision for the Judge.  He asked for an opinion from an expert.  It’s likely the Court will give deference to the opinions in the evaluation, but he can decide something different.

Edited August 21, 2018 by Mrs peel
“Eval” And “evil” are very different words!

[Mrs peel]

5 minutes ago, Higgins said:

If judges were "bound" by precedence no cases would be overturned. 

Well, now you’re getting into a political discussion of “activist” courts and whether the US Constitution is a “living” or dead” document.  Courts sometimes “ignore” precedent by finding that the facts are just different enough that the prior case doesn’t apply, or the law has changed, or community standards have changed.  But a lower court that ignores the US Supreme Court, for example, will find itself slapped down.

[Celia Rubenstein]

4 hours ago, Alonzo Mosely FBI said:

I hadn't heard this one, when was this reported?

I read it in an E news article titled "Bethenny Frankel and Ex Jason Hoppy Continue Custody Battle After Dennis Shields' Death."  

 Sorry, I can't post links from my kindle. 

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, Celia Rubenstein said:

4 hours ago, Alonzo Mosely FBI said:

I hadn't heard this one, when was this reported?

I read it in an E news article titled "Bethenny Frankel and Ex Jason Hoppy Continue Custody Battle After Dennis Shields' Death."  

 Sorry, I can't post links from my kindle. 

@Celia Rubenstein

My friend...Is this the link?:

https://www.eonline.com/news/960755/bethenny-frankel-and-ex-jason-hoppy-continue-custody-battle-after-dennis-shields-death

[Celia Rubenstein]

Indeed it is! Thank you posting it.

[Juliegirlj]

I have little respect for Bethenny and Jason as parents. They have let their grievances towards each other take precedence over the welfare of their daughter. Granted, I have never gone through a contentious divorce, and I can only imagine how difficult it must be. However, my kids welfare has always been a priority for my husband and I - and perhaps that is one of the secrets of a successful marriage- keeping the same priorities?! 

Jason does have reasons for concern if it’s true that Bethenny knowingly left Brynn alone in the care of an impaired boyfriend.( In my humble opinion)

[Mozelle]

7 minutes ago, Juliegirlj said:

I have little respect for Bethenny and Jason as parents. They have let their grievances towards each other take precedence over the welfare of their daughter. Granted, I have never gone through a contentious divorce, and I can only imagine how difficult it must be. However, my kids welfare has always been a priority for my husband and I - and perhaps that is one of the secrets of a successful marriage- keeping the same priorities?! 

Jason does have reasons for concern if it’s true that Bethenny knowingly left Brynn alone in the care of an impaired boyfriend.( In my humble opinion)

Neither Jason nor Bethenny want to put their egos aside. As such, they're using Bryn in this grudge match, and they're both fooling themselves by saying that they are in this for the good of Bryn.