STATE OF MICHIGAN IN THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR THE COUNTY OF OAKLAND WILLIAM C. EAGAN, Plaintiff, v No. 00-641851-DM JANNEL S$. EAGAN, Defendant. / MOTION HEARING BEFORE THE HONORABLE LISA GORCYCA Pontiac, Michigan - Wednesday, September 29, 2010 APPEARANCES: For the Plaintiff: RENEE K. GUCCIARDO (P47884) 30161 Southfield Road, Suite 314 Southfield, Michigan 48076 (248) 723-5190 For the Defendant: JANNEL S. EAGAN In Pro Per Transcription By: Sandra Traskos, CER 7118 Accurate Transcription Services (734) 944-5818TABLE OF WITNESSES: None EXHIBITS: None offered. CONTENTS RECEIVED:10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 al 22 23 24 25 Pontiac, Michigan Wednesday, September 29, 2010 - 9:04 a.m. THE CLERK: Your Honor, calling number four on the docket, this is Eagan v Eagan, case number 00- 641851-DM. MS. GUCCIARDO: Good morning, Your Honor. THE COURT: Good morning. MS. GUCCTARDO: Renee Gucciardo on behalf of the plaintiff, William Eagan. THE COURT: Good morning ma’ am. THE DEFENDANT: Good morning. THE COURT: All right. This is your motion. THE DEFENDANT: Yes. THE COURT: Tell me your name and why you're here. THE DEFENDANT: Jannel Eagan. Here filing a motion. Plaintiff, or whatever he is this time, defendant, in contempt of court, not abiding by Court ordered scheduled parenting time. THE COURT: All right. How? THE DEFENDANT: We--you entered an order on September second. We thought it was reasonable. It was signed. In that order I was supposed to have seen my third daughter, Caroline, for two periods of one10 cer 12 13 14 15 16 1 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 hour at a time. A week, and I have not seen her. THE COURT: Why not? THE DEFENDANT: I don’t know. Mr. Bagan has not enforced this. The therapist who was supposed to be assisting with this will not return my calls. My daughter won’t return my calls. I’ve spoken before about alienation. No one wants to talk about that. But, it’s been two years since I’ve seen this daughter. We’ve had a court order in place stating that there’s a regular parenting schedule and now you helped us with a new Court order, and I’m just trying to get it enforced. Are we following the Court order or not? In addition to my third daughter, my son: states in the order that a brief period of either parent not taking the child to their scheduled activities will present a problem. Mr. Eagan has not taken our son to diving for three of the times since this order as been entered as well as swimming for two times. Let me just make sure I’m covering everything. In the order, you know, it was kind of messy with some of the dates. There was confusion at the beginning and there was not entered in this order a right of first refusal as well. I’m not sure if that’s something we can address today but I feel that’s10 ql 12 13 14 15 16 Ag) 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 important as the parenting time schedule allows my son only parenting time with me for about 25 percent of the year. Mr. Eagan has approximately 75 percent. He travels regularly and I would like to have the first right of refusal to be with my son. We started this motion beginning in February. I’ve been trying to be heard by you to assist with reuniting me with my third daughter, at the minimum, and hoping to create a more reasonable parenting schedule that provided Leanne (ph) with the opportunity to be with both parents, And, we made a little start here. It seems reasonable and it hasn’t been followed. I am also requesting costs for my time. I’ve been here so many times and I’m not paying for a lawyer, I’m taking off of my work and I’m only trying to know if we’re going to be following the Court order so I can follow it and plan my life around it. THE COURT: And, how much time--how much are you asking for? THE DEFENDANT: I'm asking for $150 an hour. Let’s say-- THE COURT: Is that how much you make an hour? THE DEFENDANT: Yes. THE COURT: What do you do? I forgot. THE DEFENDANT: I’m a yoga instructor.10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 THE COURT: Okay. All right. Thank you. Ms. Gueciardo? MS. GUCCIARDO: Thank you. Your Honor, I’m sure you've seen the recommendation. This whole--her motion is absurd to say the least. She always thinks that she’s the victim in this case. The order is clear and what she’s supposed to be doing is clear. She's has no relationship with Caroline because of the abuse perpetrated upon her to the child. The child wants nothing to do with her. She’s 16 years old. The order says my client won’t interfere and will encourage the parenting time to take place. He does that. She communicates with the child. Now, for whatever reason the child isn’t communicating with her for whatever that she’s done, it’s not my client's fault. There’s no contempt here. She’s--in terms of setting up an appointment with the therapist, Stacey Black, last time we were here she said she hadn’t even called Stacey Black. Hadn't even made an effort to call Stacey Black. THE DEFENDANT: May I interrupt? THE COURT: Wait. When she’s done, yes. MS. GUCCIARDO: She’s done nothing. Everybody asked me, she’s like well, I was waiting for Bill to do it. I was waiting for my 16 year old daughter to do10 ql 12 13 14 15 16 a) 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 it. Everybody but her. So, she was told to call Stacey herself. We had to give her the number so she could figure it out. So, why she’s waiting for a 16 year old to set this up is beyond me. And, then to come into court and drag him into court to two different days, pull him away from his--his work, incur attorney fees to be here on this situation when she dropped the ball is absurd. In terms of the child--the son’s activities. First of all, that wasn’t in her motion. It wasn’t addressed last time. She comes in here and says I want him held in contempt of court and doesn’t have any specifics with which we can respond to. I can’t even file a response because I don’t know what she’s talking to. It’s a moving target. In this situation regarding the son, he missed two diving sessions because he had homework that he had to do on the computer and if he didn’t do it he would have gotten in trouble at school. My client sent a letter to Mr. Eaker (ph) and documented all of this and sent a letter to her. Missing the swimming he had a rash diagnosed by Ms. Eagan so he couldn’t be in the water because he had a rash, it turns out now is a staph infection. So-10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 THE COURT: Who diagnosed that? MR. GUCCIARDO: She did. He went and took him to the doctor but she said that he’s got this rash and it’s a communicable disease. So, in any event, again, we're here on ridiculous allegations. I’m asking--I've had to be here twice now. Your order--she was ordered to pay me $250 in attorney fees before. She hasn’t done it. She’s laughed it off. I’m asking for $1,000 in attorney fees for. having to be here. I’m asking that her motion be dismissed. And, terms of the right of first refusal. We were here September second. There’s no change in circumstances. There’s no change of anything. And, that only works out when people get along. These people do not get along. THE COURT: All right. Your response? THE DEFENDANT: We're here because there’s violation of Court order. It states in the order that I should be seeing my daughter two times a week, an hour each time. Once with the therapist. THE COURT: All right. What have you done to contact the therapist? THE DEFENDANT: I have an email here that shows, and I contacted Mr. Eagan as well with this10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 email, that I called Stacey Black. She has not returned my call. THE COURT: When did you call Ms. Black? THE DEFENDANT: I called her right after court last Wednesday. THE COURT: All right. So, you were here on September second and I remember you all spent most of the afternoon, right? THE DEFENDANT: Mm-hmn. THE COURT: September second. So, then you were here the--you waited, you got the order, I signed the order that day, September second. So, you waited till September 22 to contact the counselor that would ensure the visit? THE DEFENDANT: No, there is--there is--I have all the email correspondence between Mr. Eagan and I and it goes back and forth between I’m supposed to wait for Stacey to call me. She wants to see Caroline first. I’m calling Caroline, she says I should call Stacey. I call Stacey. I’m not getting returned calls. The kid’s been alienated. The father’s not doing anything to-- Ss THE COURT: What is your proof of alienation? You just can’t say it, you have to have proof. What is the proof? =10 11 12 13 14 15 16 a7 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 THE DEFENDANT: Well, two years I have not spent meaningful time with this daughter. THE COURT: Since September second? THE DEFENDANT: Since September second I still have not seen her. THE COURT: What proof do you have that Mr. Eagan is--is interfering with your visit? THE DEFENDANT: Well, when I go to the house no one answers the door. When I make a phone call to the house no one answers the call. When I leave a message I don’t get a return call. Mr. Eagan has taken all three of my daughters in order, I have a 20 year old, an 18 year old, and a 16 year old and has managed to create this. We do have psychological--the psychologist will tell you that this is what is happened that one by one as they turn teenagers they went over to his house and I never saw them again. He manufactured drama with Child Protective Services saying that I abused two of them which further alienated while I was investigated. Those were unfounded. THE COURT: But, I want to focus on what happened since September second. THE DEFENDANT: Since September second I have 1010 11 12 13 14 15 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 not seen Caroline Eagan. I have not spoken with her. IT have not been able to get in touch with her therapist. And, Mr. Eagan has not made any attempt in creating the hour with Caroline. If the therapist is not returning my call, that’s something that needs to be addressed. Why is she not and why in this--in this situation where I’m not getting calls from anyone in the household or the therapist--what are my recourses except to come here? That’s the only reason I’m here is to just--are we following the order, will I get to see my child, how are we going to create this? Last week we came here and we--they decided to rewrite the order a little bit to word it so that it would suit what’s happening. Well, here it is another a week since we were here on the second. I have proof that I called the therapist. I have proof that T spoke--that I informed Mr. Eagan of this and I still haven't seen my child so it’s another week without following the order. THE COURT: All right. Mr. Eagan, maybe through your attorney, how is it you're going help accommodate these visits? Ms. Gucciardo, what do you suggest? MS. GUCCIARDO: Your Honor, he’s encouraged the child to do that. He contacted Stacey Black. You 1)10 11 12 13 14 15 16 1) 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 know, Ms. Eaker and the parenting time coordinator were very clear, it’s up to her to do that. And, what they suggested was that the second hour of parenting time be established while Caroline is in the--in Ms. Black's office with Ms. Eagan. You know what, she hasn’t contacted me to say that Ms. Black hasn’t returned her calls. Because if she did I would call her, I would see what’s going on. She hasn’t contacted Mr.-- THE COURT: Okay, but now you know. Now you know she-- THE DEFENDANT: Last week we agreed-- MS. GUCCIARDO: We’ll call her and 1/11 see what’s going on. THE DEFENDANT: --and Rod Eaker were both supposed to call her as well as me. I’m wondering if anyone else did. MS. GUCCIARDO: Well, there was no order at that point in time. We're here. And, in terms of her other bizarre allegations. This is a woman that shows up at his house, not for parenting time, but just shows up at this house and sits in the driveway for three hours knowing that he’s out of town. So, the people are held hostage in their house because she won’t leave. She 1210 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 sits there-- THE DEFENDANT: I don’t even know where this came from. I drive up-- MS. GUCCIARDO: --in her--in her--in their driveway for three hours and won't leave. She calls repeatedly and harasses his wife. There’s no reason for it. There’s no reason for this activity. You know what she does too? She walks around-~ THE DEFENDANT: We’re not here to make me look bad, we’re here to follow a Court order. MS. GUCCIARDO: No, let me talk. THE DEFENDANT: I want to see my daughter. MS. GUCCIARDO: Your Honor, I would ask that I be able to finish. THE COURT: Let-- THE DEFENDANT: This is what happens-- THE COURT: Ms. Eagan, you can’t interrupt. We're making a record. THE DEFENDANT: Can we not discuss my-- MS. GUCCIARDO: Regarding the parental alienation that she’s alleging, the only parental alienation that goes on is her. She goes to the kids’ activities, and you wonder why the kid doesn’t want to see her, she walks around to these activities and hands 1310 ql 12 13 14 15 16 uy 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 out pamphlets to the other parents saying this is-- about parental alienation-- THE DEFENDANT: This is not true. MS. GUCCIARDO: --and saying that he’s engaged in parental alienation. Mr. Eaker interviewed-- THE DEFENDANT: She’s getting paid $300 an hour to talk negative-- MS. GUCCIARDO: --Mr, Eaker interviewed these people and they all said that they were appalled. It's embarrassing for the children. The reason there’s no relationship is because of her. She physically abused her children. CPS took them out of her house. She tried suffocating her children, She pulled her arm out of--one of the girl’s arms out of her socket. THE DEFENDANT: I can’t believe we can let this go on. MS. GUCCIARDO: She’s an abuser and that’s why the relationship is destroyed. You can’t blame him for it. I/1l call Ms. Black, but I’d ask that the order be rewritten as Mr. Eaker and Mr. Lanset (ph) have requested. And, I am asking for attorney fees for having to be here. There are other recourses. She could have called Mr. Eaker. She could have called myself. She could have called the parenting 1410 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 coordinator which is what she’s supposed to do. She didn’t to it. THE DEFENDANT: I’ve been wanting to speak with you because no one--nothing has worked up until this point in ten years. THE COURT: All right. Ms. Eagan, the problem with you representing yourself is this. If you had a lawyer the lawyer would have called Ms. Gucciardo and all of you would have not been here because your lawyer, or had you called Ms. Gucciardo, she would have tried to rectify this. She doesn’t want to be here. THE DEFENDANT: Remember we were here last Wednesday. We waited to see you and then we got called out early and she left and we came back. That’s why we're back because I wanted to speak with you-- THE COURT: See, that’s not how--what you-— what happens is if you had a lawyer the lawyer would have talked to Renee, Ms. Gucciardo. She would have said how can we work this out instead of you coming back, instead of you being here in the first place. So, you--I can’t hold him in contempt when, quite frankly, your motion it’s one sentence and it’s not specific. You don’t have any proof that he’s doing these things. So, I'm going to deny your motion and Ms. 1s10 1 12 13 14 15 16 17 1s 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Gucciardo is going to call the counselor as well. But, you need to do that. You need to do more than wait all this time. You want to see your daughter then make it happen. The order is very specific that you are to have one hour with the counselor with her. But, quite frankly, it gives a lot of power to Caroline. THE DEFENDANT: I know. THE COURT: But, if you’re doing those weird things, the games, that’s not going to help you. THE DEFENDANT: I’m not--I am not. This--just please disregard-- THE COURT: That's why I said if. THE DEFENDANT: Yeah. THE COURT: So, how about--Mr.--I'm going to follow the recommendation that says Stacey Black will set the second parenting time between you and your daughter. THE DEFENDANT: So, how long will the order--I mean, will we be back her next week? I’ve just--I've been trying to see her since February. THE COURT: No, I’m telling you if you come back here next week and not try--and haven’t tried to resolve this with Ms. Gucciardo I’m going to give her all of her fees for this time and next time too. You have to work it out. You just don’t get to come talk 1610 11 12 13 14 18 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 to me. If I see you at a party we can talk on a different matter. We can’t talk like this, you have to follow the rules. If you had hired any of the lawyers sitting behind you what they all would have done, they're all shaking their heads, they would have called Ms. Gucciardo and tried to resolve this. THE DEFENDANT: Ms. Gucciardo’s money is being taken from my children’s college fund. I’m paying for half of their college instead, which Mr. Eagan is supposed to be doing but instead he hires a lawyer. THE COURT: But, that’s not before me today. THE DEFENDANT: Well, this is the morality. This is the morality of the whole system and what's going on, and it’s just a shame because what’s really happening is not being addressed and it’s--despite my flaws or my children’s, they deserve to have me in their lives and this situation has been created and actually enabled by the system and the psychologist that we’re working with. For some reason I’ve been put in a light as being neglectful and it’s not true. And, we keep going with that. And, the person who has the lawyer and the money prevails. THE COURT: No, you know what, that’s not true. It’s not true. The person that has the facts on their side and the law on their side, that’s the person aa10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Ag) 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 that prevails. THE DEFENDANT: I have the facts. I have two years of not seeing my daughter. But, that doesn’t seem to weigh any--weigh heavily. I don’t understand why. THE COURT: Well, you agreed when you were here last September--on September second to the two hours with the counselor. THE DEFENDANT: Yep and it hasn’t happened. And, so that’s what I’m saying. THE COURT: If you had been trying--I would have thought as a mom you would have walked out of here on September second and called Stacey Block but you didn’t do that. THE DEFENDANT: I have spoken- THE COURT: Okay. I ruled. I ruled. I wish you good luck. If you have proof of alienation after you consult with your attorney or his attorney, then bring it on, but you don’t have proof so I’m going to deny your motion and your request for costs. THE DEFENDANT: I’m wondering if you passed on that information to your staff about the conference in New York about parental alienation. I got two free tickets; did you send someone? THE COURT: No, I just let everybody know 1810 about it. THE DEFENDANT: I hope so. I hope we can get educated in this sooner so other people don’t have to go through this. THE COURT: I do wish you good, luck Ms. Eagan. And, Mr. Eagan, I wish you good luck and the children even more. MS. GUCCIARDO: Thank you, Your Honor. (At 9:20 a.m., proceeding concluded.)10 11 12 13 14 COUNTY OF OAKLAND jss. STATE OF MICHIGAN ) I certify that this transcript is a true and accurate transcription to the best of my ability of the proceeding in this case before the Honorable Lisa Gorcyca as recorded by the clerk. Proceedings were recorded and provided to this transcriptionist by the Circuit Court and this certified reporter accepts no responsibility for any events that occurred during the above proceedings, for any inaudible and/or indiscernible responses by any person or party involved in the proceeding or for the content of the recording provided. Dated: December 6, 2010 20