CALIFORNIA FAMILY LAW
...Custody and Visitation
......Factors Considered in Cust./Visit. Award
.........Domestic Violence: Cases
9 Cards On This Topic:

Trial ct. erred when it found that the FC §3044 presumption would be rebutted once F completed six months of DV counseling; presumption must be rebutted by evidence, and trial ct. had not yet received this evidence.

As trial court did not apply the FC §3044 rebuttable presumption re DV to mother's custody modification request, and improperly considered FC §3040, decision was "infected by legal error" and an abuse of discretion.

FC §3044 presumption is triggered not by the issuance of a restraining order, but rather by a finding that a parent has engaged in an act of domestic violence against the other parent, the child, or the child's siblings.

Since FC §3044 trumped FC §3011, V already protected by DV restraining order did not have burden of producing evidence of DV at custody modification hearing.

FC 3044 presumption changes the burden of persuasion, but is not conclusive on the court, even if it resulted in a criminal conviction.

DVPA custody order is not a “permanent custody order” for purposes of move-aways.

Where no custody mediation, no notice of rebuttable presumption against custody award to domestic violence perpetrator required at protective order hearing.

Prejudicial error to exclude murdered W's diary entries; directly relevant to domestic violence and H's ability to control temper.

Past acts or crimes may be considered in custody matters.