Pfrimmer v. Leblond, 2011 ONCJ 753

North Bay Registry No. FC361-01 DATE: 2011·XII·21 CITATION: Pfrimmer v. Leblond , 2011 ONCJ 753 ONTARIO COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN: ) ) THERESA DAWN PFRIMMER, Applicant ) ) ) William A. Sangster, counsel for the applicant ) ) ) ANDRE VICTOR LEBLOND, Respondent ) ) ) Clemmens Eggert, counsel for the respondent ) ) HEARD: December 15, 2011 [ 1 ] JUSTICE G.P. RODGERS:— There are two motions before the court. Theresa Pfrimmer wants more access to her son, Brayden Andre Pfrimmer-Leblond (D.O.B. Feb. 11, 2000).

Brayden’s father takes the position that Brayden’s access to his mother should remain as it has been for the last three months. He brings a motion of his own regarding child support. [ 2 ] I have now read the affidavits of both parents and the assessment prepared in September 2011 under

section 30 of the Family Law Act , R.S.O. 1990, c. F-3, as amended. Background [ 3 ] On November 22, 2007 a temporary order was made on the basis of minutes of settlement. Both parties agreed Brayden would live with his father in North Bay and his mother would have access every second weekend from Friday at 5:00 p.m. to Sunday at 5:00 p.m. Ms. Pfrimmer was required to pay child support in the amount of $112.00 per month. Ms. Pfrimmer had been the primary care giver since the parents separated many years ago. Mr. Leblond had been the access parent. Ms.

Pfrimmer had relocated to Sudbury and Brayden wished to remain in North Bay. Accordingly, the parents agreed to have Brayden reside with his dad. [ 4 ] In the spring of 2011, Ms. Pfrimmer moved back to North Bay. She is in a relationship with Mr. Cory McDonald and they have two children together. Upon returning to North Bay, Ms. Pfrimmer brought a motion to vary the 2007 temporary order to provide joint custody and a week-on week-off rotation. A

section 30 assessment was ordered and completed in September 2011. That assessment recommended joint custody and recommended increased access to occur for two consecutive weekends from Friday after school to Monday morning. It was recommended that Brayden have a two overnight mid-week visit with his mother in the third week. It was clear to the assessor that Brayden wanted to spend equal time with both of his families. [ 5 ] At the time that the

section 30 assessment was disclosed, Mr. Leblond offered to increase Ms. Pfrimmer’s access to every second weekend from after school Friday to Monday morning and from after school on every Wednesday until the next morning. Ms. Pfrimmer accepted this proposal and that has been the status quo for the last three months. Mr. Leblond would like this access

schedule to continue. [ 6 ] He also agrees that there is no longer any need to ensure that Brayden is never alone with Cory McDonald. [ 7 ] These parents do not get along. They do not communicate productively. Since the matter has been before the courts there has been a need for police assistance, an ex parte motion, and numerous complaints to the children’s aid society by Ms. Pfrimmer. It is unlikely that they would be capable of co-operation and communication required of parents with joint custody; however I am impressed that they came to an agreement concerning access after the

section 30 assessment. That agreement, while not identical to the assessor’s recommendation, does come close to following the direction the assessors provide. [ 8 ] I conclude that the access structure agreed to by the parties and in place for the last three months should continue. In reaching that conclusion I take into account: 1) Mr. Leblond has had primary residence for four years. 2) Brayden has many extracurricular activities that occur on weekends.

3) Brayden sometimes does not complete his homework when at his mother’s home. 4) I am mindful of the child’s wishes. I note that he will soon be 12. 5) Ms. Pfrimmer has moved on many occasions. There appears to be more stability in the Leblond home. 6) Ms. Pfrimmer has totally ignored her obligation to pay child support.

Access and child support are two separate issues but the dereliction of the moral and legal obligation to financially support one’s own child suggests at least a level of irresponsibility. 7) There is a more predictable access rotation in the status quo than in the assessor’s recommendation access schedule. 8) The status quo allows both parents to have an equal number of weekends with Brayden to enjoy recreational activities. [ 9 ] Mr. Leblond raises the issue of child support. He asserts that he has only received one $112.00 payment since November 22, 2007. Ms.

Pfrimmer concedes that she has made very few payments. It appears that she may be over $5,000 in arrears accruing from the 2007 order. I will leave any enforcement of that order to the Family Responsibility Office. However, I will make a temporary order for ongoing support together with a condition requiring Ms. Pfrimmer to disclose her financial information. [ 10 ] There shall be a temporary order: 1) Mr. Andre Victor Leblond shall have custody of the child Brayden Andre Pfrimmer-Leblond, born on February 11, 2000. 2) Ms.

Theresa Pfrimmer shall have access every second weekend from Friday at 5:30 p.m. to the following Monday morning when Brayden will go to school from his mother’s residence. Ms. Pfrimmer shall also have access from every Wednesday after school to the next morning when Brayden shall go to school from her residence. Any PD days on Fridays will be added to Ms. Pfrimmer’s weekend access. If a Monday following access is a holiday, access will be extended by that day. 3) Brayden may pursue telephone access to either parent. 4) Brayden may be alone in the presence of Cory McDonald during access. 5) Ms.

Pfrimmer shall transport Brayden to all of his scheduled extracurricular activities if they occur during an access period. If she is unable to do so she will notify Mr. Leblond to give him the opportunity to bring the child. Either parent may attend any extracurricular activity regardless of the access schedule. 6) Summer holidays are to be shared on a week about basis. The last week of summer holidays will always be with Mr. Leblond. 7) The parents are free to make alternate agreements for access. They should communicate with each other civilly. 8) Ms.

Pfrimmer shall disclose her 2010 income tax return and notice of assessment and 2011 pay stubs by January 30, 2012. She shall disclose her income tax returns and notices of assessment by July 1 st of each year. 9) She will pay child support for the child Brayden Andre Pfrimmer in the amount of $172.00 per month based on an annual income of $20,400 (the minimum wage) pursuant to the Child Support Guidelines , O. Reg. 391/97, as amended. 10) There shall be a support deduction order. [ 11 ] This matter is adjourned to February 2, 2012 in courtroom #201 at 9:00 a.m.

These parents are encouraged to attempt to resolve this case. It has been perpetually before the court since 2007. Released: 21 December 2011 Signed: “Justice Gregory P. Rodgers”