Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Two parents are divorced. The father, who is currently deployed, purchased a vehicle and phones and continues to pay for cell service, car insurance, etc. Is the mother legally able to take away either of these physical assets as punishment with or without consent from the father?
I'm not sure if the UTMA/UGMA would apply or if the items would be considered the child's property. Please clarify whether or not the mother has the right to take these items as the child currently lives in her residence.
If the parents can't agree on the proper use of these assets then the other parent has no business buying them because it's a fight waiting to happen with the kid in the middle. If the car was purchased as a necessity to get to a job or visit the other grandparents then that should have been established upon purchase and both parent's agree that if Suzy comes home late then the car keys get taken away except for job use or to visit Grandma on the weekend and that's it or something to that effect. If the phone is to be able to cal the other parent then they should always be able to use it for that while it should be able to be taken away at other times if they are perhaps misusing it by texting their friends at 3am.
Giving a kid a phone or car and then saying the custodial parent has absolutely no say in it's use or perhaps misuse isn't fair to anyone most of all the kid because it just becomes a weapon between the parents or a weapon for the kid against the parent they are mad at for punishing them.
Status:
"I don't understand. But I don't care, so it works out."
(set 5 days ago)
35,620 posts, read 17,948,343 times
Reputation: 50641
This came up recently in a court case, where the mother was arrested for theft of a phone that belonged to the divorced father.
It went all the way to the seating of the jury, before the prosecutor agreed she had the right to take the phone from her daughter, but that she had to return the phone to her ex husband. She couldn't keep it herself.
So, yes.
I'm guessing you're the dad, but I could be wrong. If you are, your ex wife needs to give that car and phone back to someone on your side of the family, and yes, the teenager will have access to those when visiting.
I seem to remember a case of sour grapes where the mother had the father arrested for theft after he took their daughter's phone away. It was quickly dismissed after the police got "The Rest of the Story."
Practically speaking, a school can take a student's phone, though they can't keep it.
There's a civil tort known as "conversion." Its the civil equivalent of theft. For example, I pay you to store a boat in your garage, and you then move it to your beach house and use it for your own use and refuse to give it back, or sell it, etc...
I would guess that in the case above, Mom has the right to deprive the teenager of the car and the phone, but must return them to the Father on his demand for them. I've no idea what standing he would have to demand he return the phone to the daughter.
If the father is deployed and the kid is under 18 it sounds to me like the mother has custody and is responsible for the child's behaviour. If maintaining discipline means suspension of privileges then yes, she has that right.
I know that's not what you wanted to hear.
Point to where in the legal code you found this. In most states, just because a child is under 18, it doesn't follow that one parent can arbitrarily take property away.
If the child is in the mother's home, it's her rules as I'm sure the child is not paying rent to live there. If said child can't behave, yes, taking away pleasures is a suitable punishment. My kid got laser guns for Christmas. They were a gift. I can still take them away for bad behavior even though they were a gift. My house, my rules!
Um, no. If you can take them away, then that isn't a gift, it is a loan. You shouldn't be saying that things are "gifts" if you are going to hold them hostage for manipulative purposes. And the fact that they live in your house is mostly irrelevant. By that reasoning, a tenant who can't make rent one month should be not only evicted, but should have all their belongings confiscated. Quite twisted logic indeed.
Point to where in the legal code you found this. In most states, just because a child is under 18, it doesn't follow that one parent can arbitrarily take property away.
It's likely considered Common Law, which applies in addition to statute law in many states. You're implying that parents don't have the right to enforce rules on minor children. Take that to a court and see what happens.
Mom can take items away from child, but has to give them back to dad.
I have confiscated items from my step-children before and given the items back to their mother when necessary for disciplinary purposes. As long as you give the item back to it's actual owner (the person who paid/pays for it), then legally it's fine.
Point to where in the legal code you found this. In most states, just because a child is under 18, it doesn't follow that one parent can arbitrarily take property away.
Its generally held that property held by minors is the Minor's property, whether that's a gift or inheritance or something they bought with their babysitting money, though minor's can't enter into a contract on their own (a car, car insurance, a cell phone plan.)
Parent's do have the legal right to exercise custodial control over their kids. So, if Grandma or Dad or whoever gave the kid a phone, X Box, Bicycle, etc, the parents can certainly confiscate it from them, although theoretically they can't sell it or throw it out.
This is the balance between the civil liability that parents have for minor children, and minor's property rights.
An easy example would be an iPad and cyber-bullying. It wouldn't be reasonable ]to hold parents civilly liable for harassing a classmate into committing suicide if the parent didn't have the right to restrict their access to their iPad.
Again, it goes back to the civil law tort of conversion. If I park in a parking lot you own and have posted, you have the right to tow my car. You don't have the right to tow my car, refuse to tell me where to find it or how to get it back, and sell the car for your own enrichment.
So the argument about a car or phone is irrelevant because the other parent owns the property, and as long as Mom doesn't restrict the property from DAD, she can take DAD's Property from Daughter when Daughter is in her custody, she just have to give it back to DAD if he asks for it. If it were the Daughters property, Mom could restrict her access to the property.
It's likely considered Common Law, which applies in addition to statute law in many states. You're implying that parents don't have the right to enforce rules on minor children. Take that to a court and see what happens.
And yet...I would imagine that 98 out of 100 police departments would say, "We're not getting in the middle of that." Especially if someone calls and says, "My Ex Wife stole my daughter's phone."
Even the cases you cite reinforce that parents in fact do have the right to take their kids stuff as punishment. The thing is, once a few cases like that are decided, it becomes more and more certain and established.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
