Q: My granddaughters by court order have to spend there summers in California with there father. Can they refuse?

A: The girls' wishes should be considered, but it isn't their decision. The parents will need to modify the custody order to reflect any changes. If an agreement can be reached it should be fairly simple for an attorney.

Refusal to comply with the current is a violation, regardless of what the girls want.

In order to ensure the best possible schedule, the legal guardian needs to consult with an attorney, at least in a limited role. Perhaps an agreement can be reached. Far too often, an individual leaves court disappointed because they weren’t properly prepared.

Limited-scope representation is when you and a lawyer agree that the lawyer will handle some parts of your case and you will handle others. This is different from more traditional arrangements between lawyers and clients where a lawyer is hired to provide legal services on all aspects of a case, from start to finish. Limited-scope representation is sometimes called “unbundled legal services” or “discrete task representation.”

I am licensed in Minnesota and California.

A: It really depends on the facts of the case and how parenting time could be restructured. It is very possible that ending summered in California would reduce parenting time enough that the court would consider it a modification of custody, which would likely necessitate showing endangerment.

That said, at age 17, the child’s wishes carry a fair amount of weight (not so much for the 13-year-old). It may be possible to at least reduce the time in CA, but would depend on the specifics and whether the court can be convinced that doing so would be in the children’s best interests.