My case originated in the year 2000 with my ex filing a petition for divorce. Obviously, I was listed as the Respondent in the case and have been listed as that in all subsequent cases involving custody, child support, etc. as issues arose throughout the years. Question... as of August, 2010. There are no open cases. But, for the first time in the longggg history of case, I wish to open my own Contempt Case/Change of Venue Motion - am I still the "Respondent" or am I now the "Petitioner"??

You would be the Petitioner if this is to open a new matter with the same person.

Awesome! Thank you!

You would be the Petitioner if this is to open a new matter with the same person.

I'm not going to reddie you Twink - but you're wrong. Well, half-wrong.

The OP wants to file two motions - one to hold his ex-wife in contempt, the other to change venue. The motions pertain to the same case in which the ex-wife was the Petitioner and she will remain the same throughout the length of this case.

You're right that if it were a NEW case, he'd be the Petitioner - but this is for an already existing case.

... if it were a NEW case, he'd be the Petitioner - but this is for an already existing case.

If his motion for change of venue is granted, the new venue-court would open a new case, with a new file number, I imagine. Then, conceivably, he could be the petitioner, if he were given leave to file a new petition.

If his motion for change of venue is granted, the new venue-court would open a new case, with a new file number, I imagine. Then, conceivably, he could be the petitioner, if he were given leave to file a new petition.

The more you post, the more I am shocked that you managed to practice successfully.

My husband's case was transferred to another county due to both parties no longer residing in the original county they divorced in. Even though he initiated the proceedings, he was still listed as the Respondent in the new county with the new case number.

Just because you change venue doesn't mean the case changes.

The more you post, the more I am shocked at your bitter, spiteful attitute.


My husband's case was transferred ...

Ok. Since some court clerk somewhere did it one way in your husband's case, that must be the way it is done everywhere. Gotcha.

The more you post, the more I am shocked at your bitter, spiteful attitute.



Ok. Since some court clerk somewhere did it one way in your husband's case, that must be the way it is done everywhere. Gotcha.

You're the "attorney." Prove me wrong.

I'm not spiteful towards you. I'm frustrated with crappy advice being given by someone who allegedly used to practice, coupled with consistent arguing over absolutely nothing.

The more you post, the more I am shocked at your bitter, spiteful attitute.



Ok. Since some court clerk somewhere did it one way in your husband's case, that must be the way it is done everywhere. Gotcha.

If the court determines that it would be more convenient for the parties if the trial were held somewhere else, or if the court determines that there is so much publicity about the case in one community that it should be heard elsewhere to assure a fair trial, the court will permit the case to be heard in a different location. This is called a change of venue.

The appellant will remain appellant,the petitioner will remain as petitioner.
This8384 is right