Author: JGL Law

David Bulitt: [00:00:00] Welcome to JGL Law for You. JGL Law for You is a podcast by
lawyers, but not for lawyers. Only on JGL Law for You will we discuss a wide array of
topics to help you navigate the many legal processes, developments in the law, other
current events, and how they may affect you, your family, or your business.

We’re back on JGL Law for You, and joining me again is my good friend and law
partner, Chris Castellano. Chris has been practicing law for over a decade and is now
my partner here, Joseph Greenwall, and Laake. Today, we’re here to talk about
something that is particularly topical this time of year, and that is how to manage the
holidays if you’re separated, divorced, or in the midst of either.

So there’s a lot of stress that arises this time of year. This is when folks that do the work
that Chris and I do like to stick our heads in the sand and pretend that we’re in The
Bahamas somewhere, but that generally doesn’t happen. So Chris, let’s start from the
top down. [00:01:00]

We want to talk about how to keep the holidays peaceful while also making them
memorable for our families and for our children. How are you doing today?

Chris Castellano: I’m doing well. Thanks for having me back here, David, as always.
This topic, especially during this time, is so critical, and it’s so easy to lose sight of it
when people are struggling with their spouse, ex-spouse-to-be, or their ex.

It’s a difficult time because the holidays heighten those emotions. But as you rightfully
point out, it’s about focusing on the kids and allowing them to create the memories that
they need for their childhood.

David Bulitt: I also want to talk more about this later, because, as we discussed earlier,
it’s also trying to maintain family traditions, right?

At the same time, when you have two households, that can also be difficult, right?

Chris Castellano: Yeah, absolutely. Traditions, at their core, are about creating those
memories for the kids, right? For that [00:02:00] next generation. So that generations to
come still have that tie back to family, to culture, etc.

When we look at that, it’s important that, at its core, it’s stability. It’s allowing the kids to
enjoy that level of stability. If parents stray too far away from the focus of stability, what
you end up doing is hurting the kids in the long run. So consistent with the idea of what’s
in the best interest of those children, how do we maintain stability?

How do we maintain traditions? How do we maintain the ability for these kids to create
these memories during the holidays?

David Bulitt: Okay, so that dovetails into talking about specifics in terms of the hot-
button areas where the holidays can be challenging and stressful for parents and
families.

Chris Castellano: Yeah. Let’s start with families that have not yet entered into an
agreement.

I think that’s fair, right? We are in the midst of things. Maybe the [00:03:00] family — one
spouse or the other — filed a domestic violence petition in October, or a divorce petition
is pending, and we don’t have any immediate resolution. The first step is to go ahead
and identify the holidays that we’re talking about and who values them, quote-unquote,
more highly than the other parent.

I think that’s important because it allows that parent, the one who values it a little bit
higher — perhaps Thanksgiving, Christmas, what have you — to be the one that’s
ingrained in those traditions with the kids. The most important part of that, of course,
when you’re talking about the nuts and bolts, is communication. Because, again, we
don’t have an agreement in place.

So it’s about communicating clearly about the kids in a simple way. Perhaps this has
been the schedule that we’ve been abiding by informally. It’s going to require a bit of
[00:04:00] flexibility, a bit of a change, but this is what we think is in the best interest of
the kids. That communication shouldn’t come at the last minute.

Ideally, it should come about three days before a holiday, at a minimum.

David Bulitt: Or even before, right? Ideally, it’s well in advance. Three days sounds
good, but by that time, somebody could already be on a plane coming to visit, one
person’s buying a turkey, and the other thinks they’re taking the kids out to a restaurant
for dinner or something like that.

Chris Castellano: Well, that’s right. When we talk about this, don’t wait till the last
minute. Do it as soon as you can. Communicate as soon as you can. If it comes down
to it, I don’t want you communicating the day before. As David says, I want you at the
very latest three to four [00:05:00] days, but let’s communicate weeks in advance.

David Bulitt: So there’s a lot of stress in terms of scheduling. People are going to have
disagreements, particularly if there’s not something in writing. But assuming they get to
that point where they figure things out, is it important to — and I know this might be age-
specific — let the kids know, here’s what we’re doing?

We’ve talked about how we’re going to handle things. You’re going to do this for
Thanksgiving Day or the first half of the weekend, and you’re going to do this for the
other half of the weekend, something along those lines. Isn’t it important to
communicate that to the children as well?

Chris Castellano: Oh yeah, absolutely. Establishing what the calendar is going to be and
look like for the kids allows them to be able to anticipate what they’re going to be looking
forward to. You don’t want to catch them off guard and surprised as well.

They have expectations. David, you and I have done these cases. You’ve done it for
longer than I have, and I think that what I’ve recognized — and I’m sure you have as
well — is that the parents, they recognize the [00:06:00] importance of traditions,
values, etc., for the kids. But I think that what goes unrecognized and unidentified is the
kids’ expectations.

A kid’s going to look at Thanksgiving. What are they looking at? They’re thinking, “I want
to sit at nine o’clock and watch the parade. I want to be able to smell stuffing cooking in
the kitchen.” What they don’t want to be doing is driving two and a half hours at 10
o’clock in the morning down to mom’s grandparents’ house, right?

So, it’s important to establish for the kids what they can expect so that they’re not
disappointed. Because I tell you, the moment they get disappointed, their minds aren’t
fully developed. So, they’re going to start lashing out in ways that you don’t anticipate.

David Bulitt: So, let’s talk about — since it’s the closest — Thanksgiving specifically.
This is not a 10-day, 12-day, or two-week break from school. This is a long weekend,
essentially Wednesday to [00:07:00] Sunday for many, and some kids in private school
actually do have a week, the full week off. But let’s talk about Thanksgiving specifically
and what, if any, particular issues this presents to parents and their children.

Chris Castellano: Yeah, so Thanksgiving, thankfully, it’s a secular holiday. So, we can
set aside that complication. But it’s a middle-of-the-day holiday, right? What I mean by
that is, typically speaking, the meal is going to happen at around — well, I don’t know
about you, David — but typically it’s like a one- to three-o’clock meal, right?

It’s one of those wonderful holidays that doesn’t really make sense as far as the timing
is concerned. What that does is introduce the complication of what are we doing with
the holiday? Where are the kids going to be? So what the lawyers like to do in a lot of
agreements is, perhaps, both parties value Thanksgiving heavily. In that case, they say,
“Listen, I’m going to get the first half of the day, [00:08:00] and then at two o’clock the
kid’s going to transition over to the other parent for the second half and maybe part of
Black Friday.”

Ideally, that could work, but you have to balance that against a lot of other expectations
of other guests. For me personally, I’m going to a house with 20 chairs being seated,
right? So, you can’t exactly tell them, “Hey guys, I know you want the turkey now and
the stuffing while it’s hot, but you’ve got to wait until I can get my ex-wife to bring the kid
over,” right? That starts to get complicated.

So again, communication is key. You got to establish that expectation with the kid,
establish it with your spouse, your ex-spouse, what have you, and really identify it. But
of course, the simpler approach, which a lot of our agreements also have, is you’re
alternating the years. Some people have Thanksgiving on an odd year. Some have it on
an even year. So, if you have that established agreement, [00:09:00] read the
agreement. Read it well in advance of Thanksgiving.

I can’t tell you how many times, David, I’ve had people call me up, and I say, “Well,
when’s the last time you opened up that PDF? When’s the last time we read that
agreement?” Then they think, “Oh geez, Chris, well actually this is an odd year, so it’s
not my Thanksgiving.”

David Bulitt: After doing this for as long as I have — in December, it will be 39 years. I
don’t know why I keep bringing that up, but I’ll be starting my 40th year of doing this
work, which is maybe longer than some of the folks listening have been on the planet.
I’ve found that the two better options are what you’re talking about, which is not splitting
the day in half because that, in theory, does exactly what you just talked about, which is,
okay, they’re with me from the morning until two or three o’clock in the afternoon. Mom
or dad comes and picks them up, drives them down to Virginia, where the family’s
gathered.

So, they’re an hour in the car on Thanksgiving Day, which can be rough with traffic in
the DC area and certainly [00:10:00] other urban areas. Then you’re plopping these kids
in the car, taking them away, maybe from cousins or others, to go drop them someplace
else.

So my experience has been where people either alternate the entirety of the weekend,
which is Wednesday after school to Sunday evening, or they split it in half like you were
talking about, which is maybe Wednesday after school until Friday, so that way the
parent who doesn’t have Thanksgiving can do their Thanksgiving on Friday or on
Saturday.

At the end of the day, I don’t think the kids care that it’s Thanksgiving Day. I think that
most kids just want to be with their families. So if you’re having a second Thanksgiving,
right, don’t you think that’s a better approach than splitting the day in half?

Chris Castellano: A hundred percent. When you are in this situation in your life, flexibility
is key, and understanding what the net gain is to the kid, right? Are you going to have a
Thanksgiving Day parade on a Friday? No. No, you’re not. And it is what it is, [00:11:00]
right? But you’re likely to still have football on. You’re likely to still have a lot of those
traditional Thanksgiving items present. Then you can go and create your own mini
traditions on that Friday to make it feel like a unique day.

A lot of people put up their Christmas decorations the day after Thanksgiving. You can
build your second Thanksgiving around that concept if you’re splitting those holidays.
There are a bunch of different options.

David Bulitt: That’s a terrific idea. I hadn’t thought about that, but yeah, that’s a very
good idea. I think also what I’ve encouraged people to do if they’re in their off years —
so you either split the day or split the weekend — is to tell your family that you’re
celebrating Thanksgiving with the kids on Friday or Saturday this year, right?

A lot of times, families will adjust. You may only have the kids every other year, or only
for part of the holiday. People are worried, “Oh, well my brother won’t do that,” or “my
sister won’t do that,” because their family wants to do [00:12:00] it a certain way. But
oftentimes, I’ve had these discussions with folks over the last 39 years, and more often
than not, for anyone listening, families are willing to adjust.

Sometimes they can’t or they won’t, but oftentimes they are. And asking, right? Asking
is not a bad thing. That way, your kids get to do what you’re talking about, Chris.

Chris Castellano: Yeah, absolutely. Most people put aside their — I’ll be harsh and say
their selfish desires about how they want to see something happen — and they
recognize that the greater good is for the kids that are involved.

David Bulitt: This is a bigger discussion, not just Thanksgiving, and I want to get to that
winter break and Christmas in a second. But it requires an adult to think and act like an
adult.

Chris Castellano: That’s right.

David Bulitt: Which sometimes is not so easy. I mean, it’s not about our feelings, it’s
about 6-year-old Tommy’s feelings.

Let’s turn to the bigger break, the Christmas break, although there’s not necessarily the
religious aspect, although there may be spring break if Easter is important to folks. Let’s
talk about how to manage these longer breaks, where people might want to go on
vacations, whether — again, I think we should talk about spring break as well — there
might be less of a secular piece to it for many people.

Chris Castellano: Well, that’s right. Let’s just briefly talk about spring break because I
think that’s fair. A lot of people’s agreements do require establishing that by, let’s say,
January or even December 31st. So, I think it’s fair to talk about that now.

Spring break, I find, to be unique. Some public-school entities versus private school
entities certainly have a different view. If you’re in some of the northern states, you even
have other breaks. I don’t know if you’re aware of these — I’m sure you are — but the ski weeks, right, where you have off in February, early February. So, you start to have to
balance a lot of these different breaks.

But with spring break specifically, it could be less than a week. So again, that theme of
[00:14:00] flexibility is so necessary because you can’t anticipate if your spring break is
going to be curtailed due to snow days or what have you, in addition to the complication
of whether one party or both are religious and whether there’s certainly, as the kids start
to get older, a family expectation that the kids will be involved in religious activities, or
going to church, or what have you.

That allows us to dovetail back into winter break. I think the same requirement exists
there, right? First and foremost, that holiday break, regardless of what, at least for us in
Montgomery County, MCPS wants to call it, it’s going to start with Christmas, right? It’s
going to start with Christmas, and you’ve got Christmas Eve.

My first question to clients when figuring out this holiday schedule is, okay, what are we
doing as far as who values — I use that word lightly — who [00:15:00] values that
holiday first and primarily, right? Is one parent the one that’s going to take the kid to
church, for instance? Is that an important value to them? Who values putting the kid to
bed for Christmas Eve? Who values them having Christmas morning, whether it’s
opening presents Christmas morning, or brunch, breakfast, or whatever it may be, right?

Once you start to identify that, it allows us to go ahead and craft a scenario where, okay,
maybe we’re doing that thing where one party on even years gets Christmas Eve, the
next party gets Christmas Day. Or maybe we split Christmas Day at 12 o’clock.
Ironically enough, I find, at least in my own life, Christmas Day — well, I have young
kids, and so you know, you have nap times at around 12:30. And so all of a sudden,
Christmas Day for me in the last six years has gotten to 12 o’clock, and it’s just like a
ghost town.

David Bulitt: Do you take a nap too, Chris, or is it just the kids?

Chris Castellano: I need to start taking more naps at [00:16:00] 12 o’clock. So, it does
seem to be, at least for me — and I’m sure it’s the case for other people — that 12
o’clock can become somewhat of a quiet, natural transition time where you can then go
into a Christmas dinner at around the three- or four-o’clock time period.

So, kind of similar to Thanksgiving, although I do find that Christmas allows for a bit
more of a transition in the middle of the holiday, ironically enough. Then you look at the
rest of winter break. This is what gets so complicated. You look at this year, right? Our
calendar for this upcoming winter break in Montgomery County, Maryland, includes kids
going back to school January 5th.

When you do the whole division of, “Well, okay, this year they get all of — we’ll split up
Christmas — and then one party gets it during the even years and the odd years,” you
can’t do that because now you’re talking about the last couple days of the winter break
being in that [00:17:00] straddle between an even and an odd year, which is why I don’t
like to do that in my agreements.

I’ve experienced that too many times, so I don’t do that. It’s about identifying what the
days are and then going with the two holidays, Christmas and New Year’s, and then
dividing the days in between those two.

David Bulitt: And the lesser problem, before I get to specific issues, more specific issues
as to the Christmas slash winter break, are the families that may have one child who is
in private school for one reason or another, and the others are in public school, and
therefore the dates vary, right, for their particular breaks.

So that seems to me that that’s another place where people can bump heads and could
use some assistance from someone like you to try to navigate that, not only this year
but also in years down the road.

Chris Castellano: Yeah. It requires a lot of creativity. Creating an effective custody
calendar for people and families requires [00:18:00] creativity, rolling your sleeves up,
and getting into it because if you just take it as a, “Well, parent A gets even years,
parent B gets odd years, and then we’ll just split up the holidays and we’re done with it.
We’re not going to get into the minutiae.”

Well, except that the minutiae matters to people, right? And it matters to the kids. Again,
going back to what I said and how I opened it, those expectations that the kids may
have, that a lot of times get ignored — you need to get into it, and you need to have an
attorney, frankly, that’s willing to dive into those details and really start to understand
your family’s particularized needs.

David Bulitt: I think you just hit on a hot free tip. People pay us for this tip, but we’re
going to give it to them at no cost. That tip is: don’t get tied up in getting the deal struck.
It’s easier, as you said, to just say, “Okay, alternating holidays, odd years, even years.”
Stop and think, right?

Stop and think, what does that mean exactly for my family in 2025 or [00:19:00] 2026?
What does that mean for me? Look and take a moment. Because a lot of lawyers, as
well, are looking to try to get this thing signed, sealed, and delivered. And for many
lawyers — including some who don’t have children — I liken it to an oncologist who’s
never had cancer.

I’m not saying a doctor should have cancer, and I’m not saying that’s a good thing, but it
does give you an added understanding of what your patient is going through. Just like if

you have children or have had children and raised children, that gives you an added
understanding of what you have to think about in these types of deals. Don’t you think?

Chris Castellano: A hundred percent. I’m a firm believer that perspective is something
that is sorely lacking in virtually every area of our society right now. So, I think it’s most
certainly applicable in our field. Like I said five minutes ago, right? I’m sitting there on
the couch on Christmas Day at 12 o’clock because my kids are sleeping, they’re
napping, right?

You only really [00:20:00] understand what that’s like when you’ve experienced it. So,
you can offer that option to parents. And even though Halloween is behind us now,
when you talk about Halloween, you only understand its importance and what trick-or-
treating actually looks like with kids — and not just by hearkening back to your own
memory when you were a kid — if you have that perspective of kids.

That’s how you can understand how to divide these holidays properly.

David Bulitt: It’s interesting. I had a case where the lawyer on the other side did not
have children, and I made some remark, which was, of course, inappropriate. I tend to
make more of those as I’ve gotten older. I made some remark that Ms. Blank — we’ll
leave that person blank, obviously — doesn’t have children. She responded to me,
“What difference does that make?” because this is in court, and the judge who’s on the
bench said, “I think it does make a difference.”

Chris Castellano: Yeah, I think you’re right.

David Bulitt: That, in part, led to a good ruling for my client, but we’ll skip over that. I
want to talk a little bit about the two [00:21:00] specific areas of conflict when it comes to
winter and Christmas break, or any other at least impartial secular break as well. The
first is gift giving.

Isn’t that an area for you and your clients to sort of talk through and make sure that they
and their co-parent communicate about?

Chris Castellano: I think that’s fair. Certainly, in the last 10 or 15 years, it’s become — as
the electronic devices have become more ubiquitous — more of a concern for maybe
one parent that’s a little bit more sensitive to screens, if you will, than the other.
It’s about communicating based on the age of the kids: “Hey, what do we think is
appropriate as far as whether I give this kid a tablet? Do they get the phone, the
smartwatch, or the gaming console, whatever it may be?” I think that’s certainly a valid
discussion. But to be honest with you, David, I’m not going to sit here and say that
parties should communicate on the smaller items, right?

I think on your big item that has some substance, it’s absolutely appropriate to talk and
establish expectations and make sure, especially if it’s an item that’s going to go back
and forth between the houses, that you talk about it. Do you have to talk about what
you’re putting in the stockings? No.

David Bulitt: Let me ask you this, though, because this has come up multiple times for
me, where people are usually divorced and have been divorced for some period of time,
and one parent is now in a different financial circumstance than the other.

So, “Hey, I can afford to get little Christine something expensive,” whatever that might
be — an electric bike, or pick something that costs a lot of money, or “I can afford to
give her many, many gifts.” The other co-parent says, “Well, I can’t do that. So, of
course, the kids are going to want to spend more time at the other parent’s house
because they’re getting thousands of dollars of gifts from that parent. I can’t do that.
That doesn’t seem fair to me, and it puts me in a bad position.”

Is that a discussion that you have had with your clients over the [00:23:00] years? And if
so — and it may be that it may be not. Maybe I’m just longer in the tooth than you — if
so, how do you talk to people about how they can sort of resolve those things? They
can’t tell the other parent, don’t buy this or don’t buy that necessarily. So how do you
advise folks who are in that circumstance, either on both sides of the financial
continuum?

Chris Castellano: Yeah, so I have actually had this exact issue on both sides. There’s a
tendency for the more affluent party to, as you say, shower gifts. Generally speaking,
whether it’s right or wrong, I found that the party that’s more affluent seems to have less
custody time. So, they use that affluence to buy affection.

That’s usually closer to when an agreement is signed as opposed to later. Early on in
the process, they think, “Well, geez, I’m going to just buy each kid their own Xbox or
PlayStation, and they’ll be dying to be in the house with me as [00:24:00] opposed to
the other party.” But crucially, I think it’s an important discussion to, again, understand
the values of the kids, understand the values of the parties, including the values you
tried to instill before you separated.

Those don’t go away just because you and your spouse separated, right? The kids still
have those values. They’re still looking to those values that you tried to foster early on.
So, you don’t want to discard those.

For the spouse that maybe doesn’t have as much means, I’ve talked to and counseled
people about breaking away mentally from the idea that you need to give the kid a
material item. Why don’t you say, “You know what? Your gift this year, what I’m going to
do, is take you somewhere special. This is going to be a special time just for you and me. We’re going to a museum,” let’s say. If money is real tight, there are plenty of free
options that you can go to.

And if maybe instead of buying the device, you want to [00:25:00] spend a couple
hundred bucks and take them on a trip to Manhattan, those experiences, stuff like that,
are what stay with kids. The kid’s mind is, again, forming those memories.

David Bulitt: I think that’s a really great point to make. Our brains don’t develop until
we’re, as my wife has told me, I think, until you’re 24 or 25 years old. So, what
memories do you have from your childhood? Do you remember getting that iPad when
you were nine? Or do you remember when Mom or Dad took me downtown to see
whatever exhibit it might have been, or we got on the train and went up to New York for
the day, and walked around and saw Times Square and saw the tree and some of the
parade?

Those are the things that you remember. I tell parents all the time just what you just
talked about. Think about what you remember from when you were a kid. What do you
remember? Do you remember the gifts that you got? Most people would say, “Eh,
maybe I remember when I got a bike. But I do remember when my dad took me here.
My mom took me [00:26:00] here.” I think that’s a great point to make.
So, what I want to do to wrap things up, Chris, is ask you to bullet point a couple of
really important takeaways for people who are in this circumstance to remember as they
go forward and as they look to plan for future years.

Chris Castellano: Yeah, sure. Perfect. Communication, number one, and it might be
even the most important: communication is key. Communicate with your co-parent.
Make sure that you understand timelines. Make sure you understand expectations and
make sure you’re respecting the other party in your communications.
Number two, honor existing traditions to an appropriate extent. Look to create new
traditions. Look to create new memories for your kids. That is what’s going to help those
kids adapt to this new reality.

Number three, maintain flexibility and cooperation. That is so key to ensuring that your
[00:27:00] children are adapting well and they’re enjoying their holidays. Because the
last thing you want to do is have a flashpoint and end up seeing red and blue flashing
lights outside the house because you just can’t get out of your own way, and you make
it about you and the fight with your ex or your spouse instead of thinking about the kids.
Then you have just made such a damning memory in these kids’ minds. So that is
something you need to avoid at all costs.

David Bulitt: I think those are very helpful. Folks, you should listen to this part again and
take notes. I would add two things to that, just as general type thoughts. One is to assume good intentions, and that is what I mean, assume that your co-parent is — whatever they said, whatever they’re doing — assume that it comes from a good place
and not a place of conflict.

Secondly, particularly this time of year, give some grace to people. Give some grace to
your co-parent. Most importantly, give grace to your children, right? [00:28:00] Put
others’ feelings before your own, particularly those people that you brought into this
planet or adopted from somewhere. Give grace to everyone else and take a moment.
Chris, as always, it’s been a great conversation. Over the last few months, it’s turned
into us becoming co-hosts and just sort of having these great conversations. I really
appreciate you taking the time, and I do want people to hear from you, although it’ll be in
the show notes. How do they get ahold of you, particularly this time of year when
something might — and Thanksgiving is just around the corner, a few days away, but
you have the winter break coming up — how would folks get ahold of you to talk about
this or anything else relative to separation and divorce?

Chris Castellano: Yeah, give me a call at 240-399-7881. You can get me directly
through that number, and we can talk about all your concerns or how you want to
establish new traditions for your kids and whether that’s appropriate. I’m happy to take
the calls.

David Bulitt: Awesome. Thank you, Chris. And as always, thank you, folks, for listening.
[00:29:00] We will be back next time on JGL Law for You.

David Bulitt: [00:00:00] Welcome to JGL Law for You. JGL Law for You is a podcast by
lawyers, but not for lawyers. Only on JGL Law for You do we discuss a wide array of
topics to help you navigate the many legal processes, developments in the law, other
current events, and how they may affect you, your family, or your business.

Today, we’re talking family law. Why are we talking family law? Because, as of October
1, some very, very important changes were made to the laws here in the state of
Maryland. Helping us talk through them and explain what they mean to you if you’re
potentially looking at divorce or a custody dispute with your spouse or significant other
is my partner and good friend, Chris Castellano.

Welcome back, Chris.

Chris Castellano: Good morning, David. Good as always to be back.

David Bulitt: Yeah, good to have you. So, let’s dive right into this. We’re talking about
Maryland’s new House Bill 1191, which I know has now come into effect under the
Family Law Article, Section 9-201. That’s effective as of [00:01:00] October 1, 2025.
Let’s start from the top and work our way down.

Why is this important to people who are either thinking of or on the precipice of looking
at a potential custody dispute?

Chris Castellano: So, 9-201 is now the unquestionable backbone of custody cases in
Maryland. It dictates — there are 16 factors laid out, and we can go into them in more
depth in a few — and they dictate exactly how the court’s going to look at a custody
case and how the court’s going to rule on that custody case because it dictates that the
court must articulate its findings based on these factors.

So not only is it a way that we as attorneys have to approach the case from its very
inception, but all the way to its conclusion by way of a court ruling. This is pretty seminal
as far as a new law for custody cases is concerned.

David Bulitt: [00:02:00] Okay. So, for custody cases, before this law was passed, how
were they decided, and how is it any different now?

Chris Castellano: They still utilize factors, right? We’re all too aware of the Taylor v.
Taylor factors and the Sanders and Montgomery County v. Sanders factors. There was
a litany of factors that we would all rely upon in order to establish and argue our custody
cases.

What’s different now is that the legislature in Annapolis took all those different
collections of factors and distilled them down to what I’d call the greatest hits of factors.
There are factors 1 through 15, and I say that very specifically. Factors 1 through 15 are
basically your primary factors to look at when arguing a custody case. Number 16 is your kind of kitchen sink. It’s the any-other-factor that the court wants to consider. But
[00:03:00] factors 1 through 15 are your definitive factors that we are now going to go
through when arguing a custody case.

David Bulitt: Alright, so you’re getting ready. You’re thinking about a potential divorce,
whether it’s just a custody dispute, whatever it may be. As a litigant — or maybe better
put, as a parent — what should I be thinking about in terms of what I’ll need to help
prepare my case and what my lawyer’s going to need to help me with so that I can
maintain custody of my children?

Chris Castellano: Yeah, so you know you and I have had quite a few recordings, and
one of the themes of my way of thinking is risk management, right? I think this is a
perfect example of that. When a litigant — or a potential litigant — is looking at an
upcoming custody case that they know is coming down the pipeline, what they want to
do, if they’re feeling ambitious, is look at these factors, even write them out, and say,
“Where are my [00:04:00] vulnerabilities? Where is it that I’ve got some type of
exposure?”

Now, of course, that could be down to the Hollywoodized version of, “Do you have
skeletons in your closet?” We can talk about that. But it’s really analyzing, hey, is this
factor going to go for me or is this factor going to go against me? Now, there’s nothing in
the new statute that says that because there are 15 factors, if you have eight and the
other side has seven, then you automatically win. There’s nothing that says that.

But it is a good way for you to look at these factors and say, “This one is for me,” or
“This one helps,” or “This one helps my argument, and these ones don’t.” Maybe that’s
where you focus. That’s where you focus your efforts.

David Bulitt: It’s almost like chemistry class. There are 15 factors, and there’s a 16th,
which we’ll talk about. You throw them into a beaker, and then something comes out. I
mean, it’s not that scientific, is it?

At the end of the day, we’re not measuring what goes into a beaker in chemistry class.
[00:05:00] Whatever these factors are — and I want you to talk about them — they’re
still subjective to a great extent, are they not?

Chris Castellano: I like that you brought it up in terms of something empirical —
something that’s right or wrong. I’m a very black-and-white guy, and I love it when there
is a structure. I’ve always had that reputation of being a rules guy. I love the rules. I love
the structure of things.

Every single person that approaches things is going to have a bias, is going to have a
subjective view on things. But I think the intention here of this new law, 9-201, is to try to minimize as much as possible the subjectivity and make it into a clear set of factors that
we analyze.

Hopefully, when you have enough of these cases being decided under 9-201, you
establish a pattern. While it’s not as empirical as [00:06:00] the scientific world, it
nevertheless makes it so that there is less variation. Perhaps this is part of Annapolis’s
thinking: there’s, as a result, less ground for appeal in custody cases.

David Bulitt: So, when a judge listens to a custody case now, at the conclusion of the
testimony, at the conclusion of the trial, is that judge required to tick through these
factors and say, “This is what the evidence showed as to factor one. This is what the
evidence showed as to factor two,” and so forth?

Chris Castellano: Yes. In short, the answer is yes. Section 9-201(b) says that the court
shall articulate its findings on the record or in a written opinion, including the
consideration of each factor listed in the subsection above, right?

And by the way, relative to factor 16, which is our kitchen [00:07:00] sink, that includes
any other factor that the court considers. So, the short answer is yes. The court must go
through and identify them.

In my opinion, the effective rulings that we’ve had prior to this were the ones that
articulated each of the Taylor and Sanders factors, right? I’m sure you agree with that.
Again, that’s this idea, right? We had rulings back in the past that didn’t necessarily
articulate all these findings, or the arguments themselves were a little bit haphazard —
or scattershot, is a better way to say it.

We’re trying to make it a little more definitive, focused, and clean. Maybe make the
approaches more universal.

David Bulitt: So now what we’re doing, right, Chris, is we’ve taken those factors — the
language that was in both of those cases for the most part — and turned them into a
statute that’s really on two pages of the code, as opposed to having to read through 30,
40, or 50 pages of a court opinion.

Chris Castellano: Yeah. I love going through my cases and what I tell my clients, making
them anticlimactic. I say that because, for instance, in a financial case, once you do the
math, once you do the hard work, you can make the issues very anticlimactic. It’s hard
to argue with that black and white.

Now that we have these factors under 9-201, the hope — and I’m sure that Annapolis
shares this hope — is that you’re making these cases somewhat anticlimactic. We know
these factors. We’re not going to argue variations of the Sanders factors. We have
definitive factors that you are not [00:09:00] to deviate from. Argue these 15 factors. If
you want to spend part of the afternoon arguing within factor 16 and add about 10 other factors, that’s on you. But it’s these 15 factors that should enable any judge in Maryland
to decide a case.

David Bulitt: Okay, so are there some of these factors that may be weighed more
heavily than others? I don’t want to say more important, but maybe that is the right word
— that might be more important to lean on depending upon what your case looks like,
what your client looks like, and what their family looks like.

Chris Castellano: Yeah, it’s always interesting. We could, I’m sure, point out five factors
that we would consider generally the most important or the most critical. Then we get a
case that walks through the door, where it turns out that three other factors are actually
much more important given those specific factual circumstances.

But let’s go ahead and do it. In my opinion, of the factors — and I don’t know if you want
to go through all 16 or at least the 15 — [00:10:00] I would say these are some of the
biggest ones: a child’s stability and emotional security is one; the relationships with each
parent and significant people is another; the parents’ ability to communicate and co-
parent — put a pin in that one — the location of the homes and how that affects the
child’s routine, that’s another big one; and the child’s age and preference, if appropriate.
Of those five, I would consider the location of the homes and how it affects the child’s
routine as your baseline critical factor. I mean, that’s going to be virtually critical in every
case because it affects the day-to-day.

David Bulitt: Okay, so let’s morph back for a second to the old days when I first got
started out — and the laws have certainly changed since then — but in those days,
when we were talking about getting ready for a custody case and we look at this
[00:11:00] factor in terms of the location of the homes and how that affects the child’s
routine, we told people not to leave, right?

If you have two young kids at home and you are there with your spouse, don’t leave the
house. Because if you leave, especially if you’ve got kids in school, you put your case in
a difficult position. You’re the one that’s trying to get those children — that child or those
kids — to come and live at a new place someplace that they haven’t lived before,
whereas a parent who stays there is more able to show, “I can maintain the status quo.”
Would you agree with that so far?

Okay, so now layer on top of that that folks don’t need to be separated to get divorced
here in Maryland anymore. Doesn’t this potentially cause significant harm to families
who look to be heading down the custody route? In other words, you’ve got two parents,
both of whom have lawyered up. Now they’re getting ready for [00:12:00] this custody
case in which these factors have been articulated into law, and one of them, as you’ve
properly identified, is the location of the homes and how that affects a child’s routine.

So, both parents want primary physical custody, want to have the kids primarily reside
with them. Why would either parent move out under this new law?

Chris Castellano: You know, David, this has come up for me recently in a handful of
cases. Frankly, the short answer is that not much has changed in that general way of
thinking, right? The family’s castle remains just that. Any house thereafter is more of a
fort rather than a castle, right? That hasn’t changed.

In fact, I would go one step further and argue that the ability to establish and maintain a
divorce case while living in the same house has only complicated this. I’m thankful that
we codified these 15 to 16 factors into law, but that’s [00:13:00] a Band-Aid over the
greater problem, which is the separation within the home.

Because not only do you leave the custody questions open — frankly, the only way to
establish a custody arrangement still remains if there are different homes — we’re
juggling two different warring concepts here, and there’s no good clean answer to date. I
appreciate these factors, but I would also appreciate maybe this term coming up in
January if we can get some clarity as to how do we deal with this very real situation that
exposes people to real harm and the potential flashpoint of domestic issues.

David Bulitt: Yeah, I mean, the issue clearly is to lay out a map for how to determine this
sort of what’s in the best interest of this child or these children, right? That’s why this is
now law, right? This is now a statute. They’re looking to try to make a map for people to
follow so judges can more easily make these [00:14:00] determinations, or at least have
a map to make the determinations, right?

Chris Castellano: That’s right.

David Bulitt: Okay. So — and also to create a little bit more uniformity.

Chris Castellano: Yeah.

David Bulitt: But isn’t the irony in all of this that the statute may actually encourage more
dispute, more debate, and more fighting because neither one wants to leave the house
and lose that edge?

Chris Castellano: Absolutely. I think that a lot of the recent changes we’ve seen to the
law — whether it’s the six-month separation, whether it’s the separation within the
home, whether it’s the elimination of the grounds for divorce down to just no-fault
grounds, and now with this — I think the idea is to simplify the process and make it
more accessible. I think that we keep hearing this.

But I believe your intuition is correct, and this is what I’ve observed: the cases have
been far more contentious as a result.

David Bulitt: Okay. I don’t want to beat this like a dead horse, as they say. [00:15:00]
Folks, we are going to put the factors in our show notes here, so you’ll be able to look at
those as you listen to this episode.

I do want to ask you about this 16th factor, Chris, and tell us what that is and why it’s
there.

Chris Castellano: So, the 16th factor is any other factor that the court considers
appropriate in determining how best to serve the physical, developmental, and
emotional needs of the child. That’s verbatim. I just read that off of the statute itself.
Can you come up with a more open-ended factor than that, David? I can’t. It’s
essentially your kitchen sink, right? Forgive me for not recalling the exact number of
factors in Sanders and Taylor. I think the last number I had was upwards of 30 if you
totaled them all together.

I’m sure that you can go into both of those cases and find some factors that you think
help your case that aren’t listed in the statute. That’s what it really comes down to. While
these first [00:16:00] 15 factors are going to be generally applicable to the population at
large, every custody case has its unique entanglements and issues.

So that 16th factor is a way that, while acknowledging the desire for uniformity, the
legislature has still allowed the court to consider the particular needs of a child because
ultimately, if you don’t allow the court to consider the particularized needs of a child,
then how can you say that the legislature has allowed the court to consider the best
interest of the child? It would have failed at its job without that factor.

David Bulitt: I hear that, and it also — again, so that there’s no confusion — layers on
another piece of subjectivity, doesn’t it? I mean, I’m Judge Bull. I’m making a
determination in the Jones versus Jones case. I’ve looked at these factors, but let’s say
there’s something that irks me about this [00:17:00] mother. There’s something that
bothers me, so I’m going to come up with something to get me where I want to go.
I’m going to consider these factors, but there’s something in my gut that tells me X or Y
should happen. Doesn’t that allow a judge — again, I know we’re trying to reduce
subjectivity to a certain degree — but doesn’t the fact of the matter remain that we’re not
really doing that, are we?

Chris Castellano: If you had, let’s say, the Smith v. Smith case also come across, and
you look at this and say, okay, these are two parents that maybe couldn’t get along.
Here are the factors, and it’s pretty down the middle. It’s not terribly controversial. It’s a
fairly straightforward custody case. It’s unfortunate; maybe the lawyers didn’t get along
in all the ways that they should have, and so the case didn’t settle, and it’s in front of
Judge Bull.

In that case, you’re comfortable. You could be equally comfortable in just resolving that
case within the first 15 factors. Then you have another case, same thing. Maybe you
only needed 14 of the 15 factors. So, I would assume [00:18:00] that out of 10 cases,
seven of them will be able to be resolved within the first 15 factors.

It is those last three that are high conflict that require the 16th factor. That is your wild
card. I don’t know of anyone that’s won the game of UNO without using a wild card,
right? In this instance, I think it’s the release valve that’s necessary.

David Bulitt: Okay. And just briefly to touch on this, the factor that involves the child’s
age and preference — how much does that matter, depending upon the age or maturity
of the child?

Chris Castellano: This is such a great question. The answer is that I do wish here on
this factor, the age of the child were explained and expanded on a little bit more, right?
Because you could have a case where a 12-year-old acts like a [00:19:00] 16-year-old
and a 16-year-old acts like a 7-year-old, right?

You talk about subjectivity. I suppose that the court is empowered to analyze that, but
the factor just says simply the age of the child. It just says the age of the child. If the
court says, okay, the kid’s 15 years old, this is what I’m going to do. I’m not going to
mandate this very, very specific arrangement. I’m just going to have it be somewhat
more open because the kid has about 15 extracurricular activities each day of the week,
and the kid’s going to be driving in a year, so they’ll be able to drive back and forth.
I think that opens up some issues, and if I could be critical and so bold as to criticize the
statute, that’s kind of where I would start.

David Bulitt: I mean, logic tells you, common sense tells us, that a 15-year-old’s
preference — assuming that 15-year-old is an age-appropriate, mature 15-year-old —
that child’s [00:20:00] preference is going to mean more than a 3-year-old saying, “I
want to be with mama. I want to be with Daddy.”

So, let’s shift a little bit to modification. Here’s the scenario: the Joneses were divorced
in 2020. There was a custody arrangement, and now that’s not working for whatever
reason. You can discuss the possible reasons for that. So now Mr. Jones is looking to
modify that prior order or that prior agreement.

Is it the same analysis? You just go to these factors, and this is what a court has to do
— look at these 15 factors plus one to make a determination? Or is there another hoop
that the person who is trying to change that existing order has to jump through?

Chris Castellano: Yeah, so the legislature helped out a little bit here, too, right? Section
9-202 is a new statute effective as of October 1, 2025, that is slotted in right after 9-201,
which we just talked about — the factors, right?

It outlines that the court may [00:21:00] modify a child custody order or a visitation order
if there’s been a material change in circumstance since the last order and if modifying it
would meet the best interest of the child. I’m paraphrasing, but that’s essentially the
concept now embodied within this new statute, 9-202.

That concept is not a new one. It is still the threshold that we have all operated on. It’s
still the magical language that we’ve all operated on. It is the idea that there must be a
material change in circumstances from the last order, meaning since the last order was
put in place, something has changed in a material way — not a superficial way, but a
material way — that justifies changing that order.

How do we change that order? In a way that meets the best interest of the child. At that
point, once you start to answer that question, [00:22:00] you are going to turn the page
backwards and go to 9-201 and start going back through those factors.

David Bulitt: Okay. And what might be — I know there’s a litany of possibilities — what
might be some common examples of a change in circumstances that would result in the
court taking a look at the potential modification of an existing order?

Chris Castellano: So, I’ll use a couple. One is listed in 9-202 itself, almost as if to
provide us an example, right? Parent B says the parent’s proposal to relocate the
residence of the parent or the child in a way that would cause physical custody to be
impractical constitutes a material change in circumstance.

There was always a question in all of our cases in the past that had this issue of how far
away is too far away to move in a way that causes a material change in circumstance.
The statute doesn’t really answer that question, but it does add a [00:23:00] helpful
layer. It refers to a move that causes physical custody to be impractical. That outlines
how you now essentially need to go back to 9-201 and those factors to start doing the
analysis.

I would also say that you can look at the factors themselves to identify whether or not
there’s a material change, and this is all going to be new, so it’s going to be up to your
argument to the court. But items such as the ability to communicate and co-parent —
that was one of the factors we talked about — come to mind.

I think that right there, sure, the court custody order in place says that they need to
communicate on all the issues and that they’re supposed to communicate through Our
Family Wizard, right? Then you’ve got a situation where Parent A, six months into the
order, stops communicating via Our Family Wizard, starts communicating via text only,
and is very combative.

That is a situation where the court says, “You know what? Section 9-202 is triggered. A
material change has occurred here because the parties are unable to communicate.” In that scenario, one of the factors is failing. That’s how I would consider that analysis
taking place.

David Bulitt: Very briefly, because I’m sure there are a few of us lawyers here who are
listening: what’s the impact of this statute on lawyers who try these types of cases, who
represent clients when it comes to either initial custody cases or potential modifications?

Chris Castellano: It identifies our ability to look at these cases and say, alright, we know
for sure that if a material change has occurred, then we’re making that change — or at
least analyzing whether we should — under the prior factors. So again, it’s moving past
the arguability under the case law and putting it into the [00:25:00] quote-unquote
uniform, or lack-of-variability, structure of a statute.

David Bulitt: Okay. And if you’re a parent who — let’s just deal with a specific example,
because this is something that happens with regularity — you’re a parent who says,
“You know, I got to move because of my job. I got moved to X, Y, or Z.” This is going to
upset the existing access schedule, right? It may result in a modification.

I come to you, and I say, “What do I do? I don’t want to not see my kids. I’m worried that
I have to move to Richmond,” — pick a place — “and that’s too far for me to be able to
get the kids seven nights out of 14 or six nights out of 14 during the school year.” How
do you work with that client in terms of trying to make sure that they don’t face what
could be a very restrictive access schedule?

Chris Castellano: Yeah. I mean, that’s always tough, right? Even non-preferential traffic
patterns can lead to what becomes an impractical physical custody arrangement,
especially in this area. It’s not [00:26:00] the best, and it’s tough on parents.

But at the end of the day, what you can do is start going through these factors, those 9-
201 factors. Again, it’s not one of those things where if you get eight and the other side
gets seven, you win. But you do need to start building up how strong of a case you
have, right?

Yes, maybe the relocation will inevitably lead to a change in the physical custody
schedule, thus requiring an analysis here. But you use those other factors to your
benefit and see if you can’t get a situation that still is in the best interest of your child in
a way that’s not so destructive to what was the original custody arrangement, or at least
as far as the number of overnights, for instance, is concerned.

David Bulitt: That calls for some creativity, right, on behalf of my lawyer in terms of trying
to figure out how I can now maximize my time with my kids despite the fact that I have
to move a hundred miles away or whatever it might be.

Chris Castellano: Yeah. I mean, at the end of the day, all these Taylor and Sanders
factors were bred out of an understanding of the statute itself, right? We now have a statute. So, in 5, 10, or 15 years’ time, we’re going to have new case law that is probably finding itself nestled within factor number 16, and there’s going to be case law that’s really going to help us truly define how we move forward on these custody cases.

David Bulitt: Okay, so let me ask you this. We’ve been talking for half an hour or so now,
but if there are a couple of real — I hate to say soundbite, but that’s the kind of society
we live in now — takeaways, soundbite-sort-of takeaways for folks that are listening, tell
me what those would be.

Chris Castellano: Yeah. In the last few years, the Maryland legislature has tried to
implement a campaign of bringing in more uniformity to family law in Maryland. I think
that this statute is the first real attempt to make custody cases [00:28:00] more uniform
in Maryland and have the bench employ less variability, less ambiguity, fewer vagaries,
and rest within at least 15 primary factors with one open-door factor, number 16.
It’s a way that perhaps the cases that we present to judges are simply just that — more
uniform and less variable.

David Bulitt: Okay. And if folks, Chris, want to get ahold of you and discuss their
potential case and what might be coming for them down the road, what’s the best way
for them to do that?

Chris Castellano: Yeah, they can give me a call right here at JGL — Joseph Greenwald
& Lake — at 240-399-7881, or send me an email. My profile and all my contact
information are on our website, and I would be happy to talk about either any new
custody issues or modification issues that [00:29:00] rest within this new statute.

David Bulitt: Chris, I want to thank you for your time. Folks out there who are listening,
custody cases are a minefield where parents regularly — and I say regularly — do
things that they ought not to do. So, if you’re on the precipice, if you’re looking at the
potential for custody litigation or just want some advice as to how to prepare for it, give
Chris a call. I’m quite certain he can answer your questions.

As always, folks, thank you for joining us, and we’ll talk to you next time on JGL Law for
You.