Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  1. Its actually the opposite. I lose an hour. Which wouldn't be that big of a deal, except I already have very limited visitation. I went from having about 40% to now only having 10%. While I hope to make sure that changes when we have a final order, it is not a certainty.
  2. The dilemma is that the previous orders all had transfer times at 6 PM (when otherwise not at school). Presumably this order is trying to mimic that time because it is familiar. If that is the case, then a flight that arrives in Washington at or before that time would be consistent with previous orders. Still, you have the perspective of PayrollHRGuy above, in which he concludes that the time zone used should be the time zone of the court. Its much complicated than it appears. I actually can see your perspective, which is also the perspective of the other party. My point is that yes, it makes sense, but its not stated anywhere and absent direction, why should it be the prevailing perspective? There are many statutes in Washington that make it clear that for Washington state business, Pacific Time is the official time. For example, Washington Administrative Code (WAC) 434-208-110 is entitled, "Reference to time" and it states, "References to times of day (i.e., 8:00 p.m.) are according to Pacific Time." This chapter is related to Elections, but is one of many that specifically reference Pacific Time. In contrast, there are only three examples in the WAC or Revised Code of Washington (RCW) that state anything different. Two of the examples are related to debt collection and are simply conforming with the Federal Debt Collection Act, which requires that the time zone used be the time zone in which the recipient of the call is located. Further, RCW 1.20.050 and 051 both state that the Pacific Time is the official time of Washington state. Title 1 more broadly implies that official things of the state (such as times) are the ones that should be used if anything done in an official capacity of the State, which I would argue includes court orders.
  3. Yes, I filed for a revision and the court declined to consider any changes, notwithstanding the fact the temporary order also includes a date that does not exist (June 31). The flight is from Idaho to Washington. It is a one hour flight. The parenting plan states the children must be on a return flight by 5:30 PM on the last day of the visitation. Is that Pacific Time or Mountain Time? Due to the flight schedules available, if it is Pacific Time, the next closest flight before that time is at 3 PM (Pacific Time). If it is Mountain Time, there is a flight at 4:15 PM (Pacific Time). Agreed. This specific issue is going to arbitration. I was just trying to get more information because my research has yielded limited case law on the matter. The temporary order will be replaced with a final order in April.
  4. And that is my interpretation as well. Absent direction, then the time zone of the court is the prevailing/governing time zone, otherwise there isn't any consistency. The court assumes adherence to its time zone for all other matters related to the case schedule so why the application of a parenting plan it ordered would be any different, I can not fathom. And no, the children reside a majority of the time with the custodial who is in the same time zone as the court.
  5. Context is that we have a temporary order and the court largely adopted the other party's proposed order. The proposed order lists times, but doesn't provide specificity. Now the other party is insisting on a standard that is not included in the temp order and it is effecting the travel requirements because of when flights must occur. I am arguing absent a specific direction from the court in the parenting plan, then the assumed time is the time zone in which the parenting plan was ordered.
  6. What about when the child is in a different time zone?
  7. Previously there was no discrepancy because both parties lived in the same time zone and in the same time zone in which the court with jurisdiction (Pacific).
  8. I think the second part of your answer when considered in context to the first part of your answer shows why it isn't obvious. You're saying (correct me if I am wrong), "it depends." Presumably there is a standard that exists. Certainly in contract law there is a standard and it is the time zone in which the contract was agreed to. If parties disagree about a time that something should occur (like an exchange), then it becomes important to know what time is the "right" time. That is, what time is the legally enforceable time. Hoping to hear from others also.
  9. If parties are in different time zones and the parenting plan doesn't specify, what is the assumed time zone for times listed? A new parenting plan has been created after a relocation. The custodial parent is in the Pacific Time Zone and the non-custodial parent is in the Mountain Time Zone. Pierce County Superior Court (WA) has jurisdiction and ordered the parenting plan and is in the Pacific Time Zone. There are times listed throughout the parenting plan, but the parenting plan does not specify which time zone is to be followed. In the absence of specific direction, is there a rule or generally accepted principle as to which time zone is the one that should be used in the event of disagreement? Is the statutory guidance or case law?
  • Create New...