Name the Violation

• Hearing held without proper notice to you
• Order entered without giving you opportunity to respond
• Ex parte order granted without emergency justification
• Court refused to let you present evidence or call witnesses
• Judge made decision before hearing your side

• Date and time of hearing vs. date you received notice
• Method of service (mail, personal, email)
• Transcript showing court refused testimony or evidence
• Docket entries showing ex parte filings
• Any communication showing pre-judgment by the court

Motion to Vacate Order (CR 60(b)) or Motion for Reconsideration (CR 59). If pattern persists, federal 42 U.S.C. 1983 complaint.

• Court applies different standards to each parent based on gender
• Father automatically treated as less capable parent
• Mother's abuse allegations taken seriously while father's are dismissed
• Different contempt enforcement based on which parent violates
• Racial or economic bias in custody evaluations

• Side-by-side comparison of how each parent's motions were treated
• Contempt enforcement records showing asymmetry
• Evaluator language showing gender or racial assumptions
• Statistics on judge's custody outcomes by gender (if available)

Motion for Recusal (if bias is by judge). Appeal citing equal protection grounds. Judicial Conduct Commission complaint.

• Court orders restricting who you can associate with around your children
• Punishment for posting about your case on social media
• Court penalizing you for religious practices or beliefs
• Gag orders that prevent you from discussing your case
• Orders restricting contact with extended family without safety basis

• Exact text of court orders restricting speech or association
• Evidence that restrictions lack safety justification
• Records of penalties imposed for protected speech or association

Motion to Modify Order (remove unconstitutional restrictions). Appeal on First Amendment grounds. If severe, emergency petition to appellate court.

• CPS entering your home without warrant or consent
• CPS threatening to take your children if you refuse entry
• Court-ordered home inspections without probable cause
• Drug testing without reasonable suspicion
• Mandatory mental health evaluations without factual basis

• Date, time, and names of CPS workers who came to your home
• Whether they had a warrant (ask and record the answer)
• What they said would happen if you refused entry
• Video or audio recording of the encounter (WA is two-party consent but you can announce recording)
• Written summary immediately after the visit

Motion to Suppress (if evidence was gathered illegally). Complaint to CPS supervisor. If pattern persists, 42 U.S.C. 1983 suit against agency.

• Judge communicating with one party or their attorney outside of court
• Judge showing visible hostility, eye-rolling, or dismissiveness toward one party
• Judge refusing to follow applicable statutes or court rules
• Judge consistently ruling in favor of attorneys they have personal or financial ties to
• Judge entering orders without reading your filings

• Transcripts showing biased statements or refusal to hear evidence
• Evidence of ex parte contact (emails, phone records, scheduling anomalies)
• Pattern of rulings showing statistical bias (win/loss rates by attorney)
• Comparison of how similar motions from each party were treated

Motion for Recusal (CJC Rule 2.11). Complaint to WA Commission on Judicial Conduct. Appeal citing judicial bias. If pattern affects multiple families, Monell claim.

• Criminal charges filed to gain leverage in custody case
• Prosecutor withholding exculpatory evidence (Brady violation)
• Selective prosecution of one parent but not the other for same behavior
• Using protection order violations as criminal weapon while ignoring other parent's violations
• Coordinating with opposing counsel in family case

• Timeline showing criminal charges filed coincident with custody events
• Evidence that was withheld and when you discovered it
• Records of other parent's similar behavior that was not prosecuted

Brady motion in criminal case. Complaint to WA State Bar. If convicted based on misconduct, post-conviction relief petition.

• Police refusing to enforce your parenting plan during exchanges
• Officers filing reports that misrepresent what happened
• Police taking sides during custody disputes
• Failure to investigate DV reports from one parent
• Arrest without probable cause during custody exchange

• Body camera footage requests (file public records request)
• Officer names, badge numbers, dates, times
• Your own video recording of encounters
• Written summary immediately after each incident

Internal affairs complaint. Public records request for body camera footage. If pattern persists, 42 U.S.C. 1983 civil rights suit.

• CPS report filed by ex-spouse or their attorney coinciding with custody filing
• Investigation remains "open" for months without resolution
• CPS worker accepting one parent's account without investigating the other
• "Failure to protect" charges against the protective parent
• CPS making custody recommendations they have no authority to make

• Timeline of CPS reports relative to custody filings
• Names of reporters (request through discovery if necessary)
• CPS findings and whether they match actual evidence
• Duration of investigation vs. statutory requirements
• Any CPS statements about custody (they should not make them)

Administrative complaint to DCYF. Request administrative review of findings. If false report is provable, motion for sanctions against reporter. Pattern documentation for federal claim.

• GAL made recommendation without interviewing you or visiting your home
• GAL spending significantly more time with one parent
• GAL billing excessive fees for minimal work
• GAL making legal conclusions instead of factual observations
• GAL aligned with the same attorney or judge who appointed them repeatedly

• Hours billed vs. actual contact with you and children
• Who appointed the GAL and how many times they have been appointed by that judge
• Specific factual errors in the GAL report
• Evidence the GAL ignored or refused to consider
• Referral patterns (does the GAL always recommend the same evaluators/therapists?)

Motion to Remove GAL. Objection to GAL Report (with specific factual errors documented). Complaint to court GAL program. Motion to audit GAL fees.

• Opposing counsel making statements they know are false to the court
• Your own attorney failing to file documents, missing deadlines, or not preparing
• Attorney billing for work not performed
• Attorney communicating with you directly when you have counsel (or vice versa)
• Attorney coaching witnesses or manufacturing evidence

• Specific false statements made to the court (with transcript references)
• Billing records showing inflated or fabricated hours
• Missed deadlines and their consequences
• Written communications showing improper contact

Complaint to WA State Bar Association (WSBA). If your own attorney: malpractice claim. If opposing counsel: motion for sanctions under CR 11.

• Evaluator reached conclusion before completing interviews
• Evaluator used psychological tests not validated for custody contexts
• Evaluator spent unequal time with each parent
• Evaluator diagnosed "parental alienation" without scientific basis
• Evaluator is part of a referral network with the appointing judge or attorneys

• Evaluator's credentials and training (or lack thereof)
• Tests used and their validation status
• Time spent with each parent and children
• Factual errors in the evaluation report
• Evaluator's referral history (who appointed them, how often)

Objection to Evaluation Report. Motion to Strike (if methodology is unsound). Daubert challenge to scientific validity. Complaint to evaluator's licensing board.

• Children suddenly refusing visitation after spending time with other parent
• Children using adult language to describe why they do not want to see you
• Other parent making negative statements about you in front of children
• Other parent scheduling activities during your parenting time
• Children expressing fear of you that does not match your behavior

• Timeline of children's behavior changes relative to other parent's actions
• Text messages or social media posts disparaging you
• School or therapy records showing behavioral changes
• Records of denied or interfered-with parenting time
• Children's statements (age-appropriate, not coached questioning)

Motion for Contempt (if violating parenting plan). Motion to Modify Parenting Plan. Request for family therapy or reunification services. Motion for Make-Up Time.

• Other parent filing repeated, unnecessary motions to force you to respond (and pay)
• Demanding expensive evaluations, GALs, and supervised visitation you cannot afford
• Refusing to settle reasonable terms to prolong litigation
• Hiding income or assets while claiming inability to pay support
• Getting court to order you to pay for their attorney fees

• Total cost of litigation so far (itemized)
• List of every motion filed by other parent and outcome (granted/denied)
• Income disparity between parents
• Settlement offers made and rejected
• Evidence of hidden income or assets

Motion for Attorney Fees (RCW 26.09.140). Motion for Sanctions (CR 11). Motion to Declare Vexatious Litigant. Financial declaration showing inability to continue litigating.

• Other parent not following the parenting plan schedule
• Denying you court-ordered parenting time
• Refusing to exchange children at designated times and places
• Not paying court-ordered child support
• Violating communication requirements in the parenting plan

• Every denied or shortened parenting time (date, time, what happened)
• Text messages or emails showing refusal to comply
• Witness statements from people present at exchanges
• Police reports if law enforcement was called
• Payment records showing missed support payments

Motion for Contempt with Declaration. Request for make-up parenting time. Request for attorney fees and costs. If pattern persists, motion to modify parenting plan in your favor.