Houston, TX, August 6, 2018 –Ramos Law Group, PLLC (RLG) is Jessica Mikellpleased to announce the addition of a new rock star attorney as part of a significant undertaking to rebuild the RLG team with the most qualified and experienced team members.  The new attorney, Jessica Mikell, will be based out of the Houston office but will travel to The Woodlands or Sugar Land offices as demand requires.  She joins the principal attorney, Mary E. Ramos, who is Board Certified in Family Law by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization, and Lindsey Lewis who has been with the firm serving as an associate attorney for three years.

Rounding out the 2018 push to rebuild the team is Christina Garza, Board Certified Paralegal in Family Law by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization who joins from the Kutty Law Firm and Megan Davis who returns from the Law Office of Joel Nass.  Jessica, Christina, and Megan were all previous Ramos Law Group employees and are all happy to be back home.

Jessica Mikell joins the Ramos Law Group from Cordell & Cordell known throughout the nation as the divorce lawyer for men firm.  Starting her career at RLG many years back, she has gone on to represent hundreds of clients from single dads to executives for fortune 500 companies.   Mrs. Mikell is well-known throughout the family law community as a no-nonsense and highly prepared divorce lawyer for men.  She has handled cases with highly contested child custody, property, and parental alienation issues.    “When clients feel like their world is falling apart, it is essential for them to have a strong advocate familiar with the journey to remind them that our job is to help them navigate the temporary muddy waters to achieve the results that will help them move on to the next chapter in their lives,” she said.

At Ramos Law Group, we offer a ‘Raving Fan Guarantee.’ If our customer is not happy with the service they receive, we offer them up to a $1,000 refund.Alfredo Ramos, Business Futurist

Mrs. Mikell will focus her efforts on the divorce lawyer for men niche clientele and help dads maintain their parental rights throughout Houston and surrounding areas.

Ramos Law Group, PLLC  was started in 2004 by Mary E. Ramos who through her efforts and those of her team has grown the organization from a single attorney firm to one with over ten employees and three attorneys.  We are committed to the practice of divorce and family law in Harris, Fort Bend, Galveston, Montgomery and Brazoria Counties. We have effectively negotiated positive outcomes in high net-worth divorce, child custody, and property division cases while keeping attorney fees under control.

If you would like more information about this topic, please contact Christina Garza at (713) 225-6200 or email at info@ramosfamilylaw.com.

Ramos Law Group

The Ramos Law Group, PLLC  is thrilled to announce the return of Christina Garza as our new Office Manager and Senior Paralegal.   She is Board Certified in Family Law by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization and rejoins the team after a short sabbatical.  She brings with her over 18 years of family law experience beginning her career as a clerk with the 246th Family Law District Court then to formally working for the Ramos Law Group for over 12 years.  While away, she assisted the Kutty Law Firm with her family law expertise and the Ramos Law Group work ethic to help the Kutty Law Firm prosper.  She decided to return to the Ramos Law Group that she loves and considers home.

“I’ve been involved in family law for over 18 years, and I am continually impressed by what we accomplish as a team at the Ramos Law Group.   The results and level of client care we achieve on behalf of our clients are unmatched by any family law firm in Houston, ” Christina Garza said after reflecting on her time away.

Laser focused on client satisfaction; the Ramos Law Group has been working tirelessly to continue to build a team who loves and cares for each client, while passionately advocating on their behalf.  To this end, the management team will be announcing the return of a previous associate attorney on August 6th.  To learn more about the associate visit  www.ramosfamilylaw.com now and return on August 6th when the name of the new Family Law Rock Star is announced.

“At the Ramos Law Group, we offer a ‘Raving Fan Guarantee.’ If our customer is not happy with the service they receive, we offer them up to a $1,000 refund.” -Alfredo Ramos, Business Futurist at Ramos Law Group

The Ramos Family Law, PLLC  was started in 2004 by Mary E. Ramos who through her efforts and those of her team has grown the organization from a single attorney firm to one with over ten employees and three attorneys.  We are committed to the practice of divorce and family law in Harris, Fort Bend, Galveston, Montgomery and Brazoria Counties. We have effectively negotiated positive outcomes in high net-worth divorce, child custody, and property division cases while keeping attorney fees under control.

If you would like more information about this topic, please contact Christina Garza at (713) 225-6200 or email at info@ramosfamilylaw.com.

           Once a court order is in place concerning possession and access, parties and their children tend to acclimate to the new schedule without too many problems.  However, if the possessory parent (the parent who does not have the exclusive right to designate the primary residence of the children) has an obstacle when regularly exercising possession, problems can arise. 

            First, it is important to understand that the possessory parent is not required to exercise each and every period of possession awarded to them in the order.  In fact, every order will contain a provision that orders the parties to notify the other parent when they are unable to exercise a period of possession.  

            Second, just because one parent notifies the other parent that they cannot exercise a period of possession, the other parent is not obligated to arrange their schedule to accommodate whatever portion of the period of possession can be exercised. 

            Most of the time, an inability to exercise possession and access is not going to be a problem as parents tend to fall into one of two categories: 1) a parent who exercises nearly every period of possession barring some medical emergency or natural disaster or 2) a parent who never exercises at all.  In these cases, there is a level of predictability for the parents and the children. 

            However, in the rare cases where a parent’s exercise of periods of possession is not as predictable, such as their work schedule is exceedingly difficult to predict, or subject to change, lack of predictability can become a problem for both parents. 

            Enforcement is likely to be a concern for both parents. 

Parents do not want to just sit at home and wait for a parent that may or may not show up.  However, not being at home for the designated periods of possession may make them vulnerable to an enforcement action, which can include fines, attorney’s fees, and even jail.

            Possessory parents who have an everchanging schedule cannot enforce their periods of possession unless they can guarantee that they are where they are supposed to be at when they are supposed to be under the order.  If they have a consistent issue with not being able to be there at the ordered time and place, there only solution may be to file a modification of the underlying order.

            Having open communication with the other parent can help alleviate these problems.  Establishing a consistent method of communication can be helpful.  Our clients have had used a variety of co-parenting apps, such as ourfamilywizard.com, to have a designated method of communication between them and the other parent.   Let the other parent know as soon as an issue arises and what your suggestion would be.  Be considerate of the other parent’s plans when asking for a change in schedule.  Figuring out a method that works for both parents can avoid future litigation.

Featured Image

NOTICE:  THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS SENSITIVE DATA

201511111

IN THE MATTER OF § IN THE DISTRICT COURT
THE MARRIAGE OF §  
  §  
JOHN “SHE’S NOTHING WITHOUT ME” DOE, JR. §  
AND § 310th JUDICIAL DISTRICT
JANE “I MADE HIM WHAT HE IS” DOE §  
  §  
AND IN THE INTEREST OF §  
JILL “CAN’T WE JUST GET ALONG” DOE, A CHILD § HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS

AGREED TEMPORARY MUTUAL INJUNCTIONS

The Court examined the pleadings JOHN “SHE’S NOTHING WITHOUT ME” DOE, JR. and finds that JOHN “SHE’S NOTHING WITHOUT ME” DOE, JR. and JANE “I MADE HIM WHAT HE IS” DOE are entitled to the joint and mutual temporary injunctions below.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the joint and mutual temporary injunctions are GRANTED, and JOHN “SHE’S NOTHING WITHOUT ME” DOE, JR. and JANE “I MADE HIM WHAT HE IS” DOE are immediately restrained, from:

  1. Communicating with the other party in person, by telephone, or in writing in vulgar, profane, obscene, or indecent language or in a coarse or offensive manner.
  2. Threatening the other party in person, by telephone, or in writing to take unlawful action against any person.
  3. Placing one or more telephone calls, anonymously, at any unreasonable hour, in an offensive and repetitious manner, or without a legitimate purpose of communication.
  4. Causing bodily injury to the other party or to a child of either party.
  5. Threatening the other party or a child of either party with imminent bodily injury.
  6. Destroying, removing, concealing, encumbering, transferring, or otherwise harming or reducing the value of the property of one or both of the parties.
  7. Falsifying any writing or record relating to the property of either party.
  8. Misrepresenting or refusing to disclose to the other party or to the Court, on proper request, the existence, amount, or location of any property of one or both of the parties.
  9. Damaging or destroying the tangible property of one or both of the parties, including any document that represents or embodies anything of value.
  10. Tampering with the tangible property of one or both of the parties, including any document that represents or embodies anything of value, and causing pecuniary loss to the other party.
  11. Selling, transferring, assigning, mortgaging, encumbering, or in any other manner alienating any of the property of Petitioner or Respondent, whether personalty or realty, and whether separate or community, except as specifically authorized by this order.
  12. Incurring any indebtedness, other than legal expenses in connection with this suit, except as specifically authorized by this order.
  13. Making withdrawals from any checking or savings account in any financial institution for any purpose, except as specifically authorized by this order.
  14. Spending any sum of cash in each party’s possession or subject to each party’s control for any purpose, except as specifically authorized by this order.
  15. Withdrawing or borrowing in any manner for any purpose from any retirement, profit-sharing, pension, death, or other employee benefit plan or employee savings plan or from any individual retirement account or Keogh account, except as specifically authorized by this order.
  16. Entering any safe-deposit box in the name of or subject to the control of Petitioner or Respondent, whether individually or jointly with others.
  17. Withdrawing or borrowing in any manner all or any part of the cash surrender value of life insurance policies on the life of Petitioner or Respondent, except as specifically authorized by this order.
  18. Changing or in any manner altering the beneficiary designation on any life insurance on the life of Petitioner or Respondent or the parties’ child.
  19. Canceling, altering, failing to renew or pay premiums, or in any manner affecting the present level of coverage of any life, casualty, automobile, or health insurance policies insuring the parties’ property or persons, including the parties’ child.
  20. Opening or diverting mail addressed to the other party.
  21. Signing or endorsing the other party’s name on any negotiable instrument, check, or draft, such as tax refunds, insurance payments, and dividends, or attempting to negotiate any negotiable instrument payable to the other party without the personal signature of the other party.
  22. Taking any action to terminate or limit credit or charge cards in the name of the other party.
  23. Discontinuing or reducing the withholding for federal income taxes on each party’s wages or salary while this case is pending.
  24. Destroying, disposing of, or altering any financial records of the parties, including but not limited to records from financial institutions (including canceled checks and deposit slips), all records of credit purchases or cash advances, tax returns, and financial statements.
  25. Destroying, disposing of, or altering any e-mail or other electronic data relevant to the subject matters of this case, whether stored on a hard drive or on a diskette or other electronic storage device.
  26. Terminating or in any manner affecting the service of water, electricity, gas, telephone, cable television, or other contractual services, such as security, pest control, landscaping, or yard maintenance, at 1214 Miramar Street, Houston, TX 77006 or in any manner attempting to withdraw any deposits for service in connection with those services.
  27. Entering, operating, or exercising control over the motor vehicle in the possession of Petitioner.
  28. Disturbing the peace of the child or of another party;
  29. Withdrawing the child from enrollment in the school or day-care facility where the child is enrolled without the written permission of the other party;
  30. Permitting an unrelated adult with whom either party has an intimate or dating relationship to remain in the same residence with the child between the hours of 10 P.M. and 8 A.M.
  31. Hiding or secreting the child from another party;
  32. Making disparaging remarks regarding any party or party’s family in the presence or within the hearing of the child;
  33. Allowing others to make disparaging remarks regarding any party or party’s family in the presence or within the hearing of the child;
  34. Consuming alcohol within the 24 hours before or during the period of possession of or access to the child;
  35. Transporting the child as a driver in a motor vehicle within the previous 8 hours of having consumed an alcoholic beverage, or permitting a third party who has consumed alcohol within the previous 8 hours to so transport the child;
  36. Ingesting, consuming, or using any narcotic substance within the 48 hours before or during the period of possession of or access to the child;
  37. Allowing others who have ingested, consumed, or used any narcotic substance within the 48 hours before or during the period of possession of or access to the child to have access to the child;
  38. Using corporal punishment for the discipline of a child or permitting anyone under either parent’s control to inflict such punishment upon either child;
  39. Communicating with each other through the child; nor
  40. Discussing any matters of the litigation with the child.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that each party is authorized only as follows:

To make expenditures and incur indebtedness for reasonable and necessary living expenses for food, clothing, shelter, transportation, and medical care.

To make expenditures and incur indebtedness for reasonable attorney’s fees and expenses in connection with this suit.

To make withdrawals from accounts in financial institutions only for the purposes authorized by this order.

To engage in acts reasonable and necessary to conduct each party’s usual business and occupation.

Service of Writ and Waiver of Bond

JOHN “SHE’S NOTHING WITHOUT ME” DOE, JR. and JANE “I MADE HIM WHAT HE IS” DOE waive issuance and service of the writ of injunction, by stipulation or as evidenced by the signatures below.  IT IS ORDERED that JOHN “SHE’S NOTHING WITHOUT ME” DOE, JR. and JANE “I MADE HIM WHAT HE IS” DOE shall be deemed to be duly served with the writ of injunction.

This joint and mutual injunctions order is effective immediately and shall continue in force and effect until further order of this Court. This order shall be binding on JOHN “SHE’S NOTHING WITHOUT ME” DOE, JR. and JANE “I MADE HIM WHAT HE IS” DOE; on JOHN “SHE’S NOTHING WITHOUT ME” DOE, JR.’s and NEDRA JANE “I MADE HIM WHAT HE IS” DOE’s agents, servants, and employees; and on those persons in active concert or participation with them who receive actual notice of this order by personal service or otherwise.

SIGNED on ___________________

 

________________

JUDGE PRESIDING

AGREED AS TO FORM AND SUBSTANCE:

 

_______________ _______________
JOHN DOE, JR. JANE DOE

 

AGREED AS TO FORM ONLY:

 

Ramos Law Group, PLLC Big Money & Associates, P.C.
1214 Miramar Street 3355 W. Alabama, Suite 444
Houston, Texas 77006 Houston, Texas 77098
Tel: (713) 225-6200 Tel.: (281) 555-5000
Fax: (713) 225-6201 Fax: (281) 555-5001
info@ramosfamilylaw.com Tex@bigmoneyassociates.com
 

 

By:______________ By:______________
Mary E. Ramos Big Tex NewHouse
State Bar No. 24045170 State Bar No. 24099999
Attorneys for JOHN DOE, JR Attorney for JANE DOE
Scroll to top