Marriage of Fatehi
Filed 5/31/06 Marriage of Fatehi CA4/3
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS
California Rules of Court, rule 977(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 977(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION THREE
| In re Marriage of PONTEA and FARAMARZ FATEHI. | |
| PONTEA DAVOUD FATEHI, Appellant, v. FARAMARZ FATEHI, Respondent. | G035148 (Super. Ct. No. 00D007106) O P I N I O N |
Appeal from an order of the Superior Court of Orange County, Gale P. Hickman, Temporary Judge. (Pursuant to Cal. Const., art. VI, § 21.) Reversed.
Pontea Davoud Fatehi, in pro. per., for Appellant.
No appearance for Respondent.
This is a child custody matter. Under the terms of a final marital dissolution judgment, Pontea Davoud Fatehi (Mother) was given sole physical custody of her two daughters. She appeals from an order modifying the custody order to joint physical custody with Faramarz Fatehi (Father). The order also prohibited Mother from changing her older daughter's elementary school. Mother contends the court abused its discretion by applying the wrong legal standard when considering the modification request. We agree. The order is reversed.
I
In June 2000, after approximately five years of marriage, Father and Mother separated and began dissolution proceedings. They have two daughters, who at the time were three years old and five months old.
After completing mediation, the parties entered into a parenting agreement. They agreed to share joint legal custody and Mother would have sole physical custody of the children. Father was given liberal visitation rights.
The dissolution judgment was entered on July 16, 2001. The court accepted the parties' stipulation giving them joint legal custody, with Mother having physical custody subject to Father's visitation rights. He was to have the children every other Wednesday night until Saturday morning. In addition, he was to visit every other Saturday night until Monday morning. A schedule for holidays, birthdays, and other special occasions was also designated.
In September 2002, Father's child support obligation was significantly reduced. Soon thereafter, the parties both signed a stipulation stating they desired to essentially reverse the custody order. Physical custody was to be given to Father, with liberal visitation rights given to Mother. However, the court did not accept and sign the stipulation and asked Mother â€
