Dear wishingphoenix:
Greetings. Yes, your court order is effective 9 May 2008, unless it also says “nunc pro tunc to January 30, 2008” on the signature line which would make it effective as of January 30, 2008 despite the fact it was signed in May 2008.
No, the fact it was signed in May should not cause you any issues in the future as the order should clearly state somewhere in the order the date of the hearing (ie. January) and you can always argue to the judge at any subsequent hearing about the reasons why the order was not entered until May.
Unfortunately for you, and many others, there are a number of cases where orders are not entered in a timely manner.
Janet L. Gemmell
I went to court 30 January 2008. Mt stbx’s attorney played alot of games and was “holding” onto the order and kept sending it back for things like, “no a comma should be here, not there.” The order for child custody, child support and equitable distribution was finally signed 9 May 2008, even though we went to court 30 January 2008.
It was signed by the judge without his attorney’s signature because he would not respond to repeated attempts (phone calls, emails and letters that documentation of were provided to the judge) to contact him and ask for him to sign and finish. A motion was made and the judge signed it without the attorney’s signature.
Here are the questions… How will this affect me in the long run? Do I officially have an order that has only been in effect since 9 May 2008 even though the order reflects the original court date? Will the lack of signature hurt me at a later date if he decides he wants to attempt a modification of child custody or child support? Or does it just make him and his attorney look bad in the eyes of the court?
Thank you… with all of his behavior of late I started thinking about this last night…