STATE OF INDIANA ) IN THE ELKHART SUPERIOR COURT NO. 5

) SS:

ELKHART COUNTY ) CAUSE NO. 20D050010DR640

IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF: )

)

ALISON GRATZOL, )

Petitioner )

)

V.  )
)

AMIR H. SANJARI, )

Respondent )

VERIFIED MOTION FOR:

CONTEMPT AND

PERMANENT INJUNCTIVE RELIEF AND

COMPENSATION

COMES NOW, the Respondent/Father, Amir H. Sanjari, pro se, and pursuant to Indiana Code § 31-17-4-4, files his motion for injunctive relief, contempt, and compensation, and in support states:

1.  That, he is respondent in the above-entitled cause of action,

2.  That, the Respondent/Father is entitled to parenting time, with both of his minor children as set forth in the Indiana Parenting Time Guidelines and by the Court’s orders (e.g. those of 02.04.2002 and mediation agreement of 12.10.2003- file-stamped 12.31.2003- attached here),

3.  That, the Respondent/Father regularly pays support ordered by the court for the children and is current on his child support payment,

4.  That, the Petitioner/Mother failed to present the elder minor child for the March 19-21, 2004 visitation,

5.  That, the Petitioner’s failure to do so was in contravention of the above Court ordered mediation agreement, (re: ADR Rule 2.7.E.3),

6.  That, the only basis provided by the Petitioner for failing to produce the parties’ eldest daughter is the daughter’s general reluctance, which is not a permissible legal justification,

7.  That, in Macintosh v. Macintosh, 749 N.E.2d 622 (Ind. Ct. App. 2001), the Court stated:

“…we have rejected the notion that a custodial parent may justify inaction simply because a child refuses to cooperate with a visitation order.
The Supreme Court’s newly promulgated Time Guidelines.. . embody the principle that both parents are responsible for ensuring that the child complies with the scheduled parenting time. In no event shall a child be allowed to make the decision on whether scheduled parenting takes place.” Id., citing Parenting Time Guideline § I(E),

8.  That, the Respondent/Father repeatedly informed the Petitioner/Mother of the law by certified letters, sent on December 01, 2003 and another on December 3, 2003, and received by Petitioner (See Exhibits A1, A2 & B1, B2),

9.  That, the Petitioner/Mother’s violation of the Court’s orders is, therefore, knowing and willful,

10.  That, all the relevant Motions and pleadings hitherto filed by the Respondent/Father are offered as evidence.

WHEREFORE, the Respondent/Father respectfully asks this Court to

- enter a temporary restraining order requiring that Petitioner/Mother produce the parties’ eldest daughter for all future visitations,

- summon Petitioner/Mother to show why she should not be held in contempt for repeatedly violating the Court’s orders. The hearing for this Motion may be further consolidated into that set for March 30, 2004,

- provide the Respondent/Father with reimbursement of his reasonable attorneys’ fees under “equity” terms,

I affirm under the pains and penalties for perjury that the above and foregoing representations are true.

______

Dr. Amir H. Sanjari, Respondent (Pro Se)

206 Berkley Manor Drive

Cranberry, Pennsylvania 16066

Ph: (724) 741 0678

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

The undersigned hereby certifies that a true and correct copy of the above and foregoing document was served upon the following:

Max K. Walker, Jr., Attorney at Law, 131 East Franklin Street, Suite 12, Elkhart, IN 46516

By Fax and/or United States Mail postage prepaid on this_20th_day of_March_, 2004.