On April 4, 2002, a family member appeared in court on behalf of the Respondent. The family member give the court a letter from the Department of the Army showing that the Respondent was ordered to perform Military Duty from September 11, 2001. The Court assigned an attorney on behalf of the Respondent to contact JAG. The attorney contacted JAG and the Respondent appeared on the next court date. The Assigned Counsel stated the Respondent's military status was never an issue based on his contact with JAG, the appearance in full military uniform and the Department of the Army letter to the Court.
On January 8, 2003, a stipulation of settlement was entered into with the Petitioner's Counsel and Counsel for the Respondent. After the first stipulation, there were other appearances in Court by the Respondent who appeared unrepresented. Each subsequent stipulation and order stated that the Respondent was in the military. The Petitioner's Counsels who negotiated stipulations of settlement and the attorney who testified did not dispute that the Respondent is in the military. For this hearing, the Respondent produced her military identification and was in full military uniform. It is not clear why the Petitioner's Counsels did a military search since the Court confirmed from the commencement of this proceeding on April 4, 2002, that the Respondent is in the military (emphasis added). See, Court's file which [*4]includes correspondence to and from the Department of the Army, stipulations of settlement with the Respondent and Orders by the Court.