IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF CROSS COUNTY, ARKANSAS
`DOMESTIC RELATIONS DIVISION
`
`STATE OF ARKANSAS PLAINTIFF
`OFFICE OF CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT
`CASE NUMBER: 549743578
`
`VS. 19DR-24-237-2
`ALAN WHITWORTH
`DEFENDANT/
`CROSS-COMPLAINANT
`VS.
`MALIGHA MURRAY CROSS DEFENDANT
`
`RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT/CROSS-COMPLAINANT’S
`MOTION FOR TEMPORARY HEARING
`
`Comes now the Cross-Defendant, Maligha D. Murray, by and through her undersigned
`counsel, and for her Response to the Defendant/Cross's Motion for Temporary Hearing, states to
`the Court as follows:
`
`1. Clarification of Child's Enrollment
`
`The Defendant/Cross-Complainant asserts that the Cross-Defendant has unilaterally
`enrolled the minor child in a daycare facility without discussion or input from the
`Defendant/Cross-Complainant. This assertion is inaccurate. The Cross-Defendant has enrolled the
`minor child in a preschool program, rather than a daycare facility, with the specific intent of
`preparing the child for the upcoming start of formal schooling. This decision was made in the best
`interests of the child to support educational development, and no court order currently mandates
`
`consultation with the Defendant/Cross-Complainant regarding such enrollment.
`
`Page 1 of 4 - 19DR-24-237-2 —- OCSE v. Alan Whitworth v. Maligha Murray
`Cross-Defendant’s Response to Defendant/Cross-Complainant’s Motion for Temporary Hearing
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`2. Absence of Existing Orders:
`
`There is no current order in place that requires the minor child to be placed in a specific
`preschool or daycare facility, nor is there an order establishing joint custody between the parties.
`The Cross-Complaint filed by the Defendant/Cross-Complainant on November 30, 2024,
`requesting true joint custody remains pending, and no judicial directive has been issued to date.
`Consequently, the Cross-Defendant's actions in enrolling the child in preschool do not contravene
`any existing legal obligation.
`
`3. Visitation and Custody Arrangements:
`
`The Defendant/Cross-Complainant's claim that the Cross-Defendant refuses to allow
`exercise of joint custody and visitation as previously followed is unfounded, as no formal joint
`custody order exists. Any prior informal arrangements do not constitute a binding legal framework.
`The Cross-Defendant remains willing to facilitate reasonable visitation consistent with the child's
`best interests, pending a determination on the Cross-Complaint. The Defendant/Cross-
`Complainant has not demonstrated immediate harm or irreparable injury necessitating a temporary
`hearing.
`
`4. Request for Hearing on Merits:
`
`The Cross-Defendant opposes the scheduling of an immediate temporary hearing
`based on the current motion. However, she requests that the Court set this matter for a full hearing
`on the merits of the Cross-Complaint at the earliest appropriate date. The Cross-Defendant reserves
`the right to present evidence regarding the child's best interests, including the educational benefits
`of the preschool placement and any proposed custody modifications.
`
`Page 2 of 4 - 19DR-24-237-2 —- OCSE v. Alan Whitworth v. Maligha Murray
`Cross-Defendant’s Response to Defendant/Cross-Complainant’s Motion for Temporary Hearing
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`WHEREFORE, the Cross-Defendant, Maligha D. Murray, respectfully prays that this
`Court deny the Defendant/Cross-Complainant's Motion for Temporary Hearing in its entirety, or
`in the alternative, schedule a hearing on the pending Cross-Complaint without prejudice to the
`
`parties' positions; and for all other just and proper relief to which she may be entitled.
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`/s/ Mark Rees
`
`Mark Rees, AR Bar No. 95039
`Rees Law Firm
`
`P.O. Box 4053
`
`Jonesboro, AR 72403
`mark@markreeslaw.com
`
`Page 3 of 4 - 19DR-24-237-2 —- OCSE v. Alan Whitworth v. Maligha Murray
`Cross-Defendant’s Response to Defendant/Cross-Complainant’s Motion for Temporary Hearing
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing Response was served upon
`Jerry D. Roberts, Attorney for Defendant/Cross-Complainant, and Kevin Watts, attorney for
`OCSE via the e-filing system on this 23" day of September, 2025.
`
`/s/ Mark Rees
`Mark Rees
`Attorney at Law
`
`Page 4 of 4 - 19DR-24-237-2 —- OCSE v. Alan Whitworth v. Maligha Murray
`Cross-Defendant’s Response to Defendant/Cross-Complainant’s Motion for Temporary Hearing
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`