January 18th, 2013
Spouses, in unhappy marriages, often wait until the end of the year, after the holiday season, to decide to move forward with their divorces. This is especially true when the parties don’t get along and the frustration between the spouses boils over related to get-togethers that go poorly at Christmas time. Spouses that are not happy in relationships sometimes wait until after the first of the year to avoid impacting on the children’s lives during the holiday season.
Divorce Filings Increased after the First of the Year
It is not uncommon for divorce lawyers to receive an unusually high rate of inquiries concerning divorces at or around the end of the year. So what do you do if your spouse says to you in early 2013, “I’m filing for divorce?” To start with, do not create a violent incident. Discuss the situation with your spouse calmly and see if marriage counseling is a possible solution to your problem.
If it turns out a divorce is going to be moving forward, the first thing you need to do is to obtain copies of all financial records, tax returns, 401 K statements, pension statements, bank account statements, checking account statements, credit card statements, copies of paychecks and all other financial records are important items when considering moving forward with a divorce. A marriage is a social and economic partnership. When the social part is over, the issues to be decided by the court or negotiated into a settlement agreement involves child custody, visitation, equitable distribution of marital assets, child support and spousal maintenance (alimony).
Hiring a Divorce Lawyer
When a divorce is inevitable, you should immediately consider hiring a divorce attorney to protect your interests. Make sure you retain an attorney who can calmly explain to you how the divorce process works and who you are comfortable dealing with.
January 10th, 2013
It is said that marriages are made in heaven. If this is true, are divorces made in hell? I don’t believe so. Divorce is the result of a marriage not working out. The dissolution of a marriage takes place in the courthouse. Children born from the marriage are victims in a divorce. Children want their parents’ marriage to work. They want their parents to get along and stay together. They don’t understand the issues that cause their parents to divorce.
The standard for determining custody of the parties’ children is the “children’s best interest.” Which parent has superior parenting skills? Which parent enriches the children’s lives more? Which parent has been the nurturing parent or primarily involved in taking care of the children’s basic needs during the course of their minority? These issues are considered in determining what the children’s best interests are. Courts always render their decision concerning child custody and visitation related to what they believe is the children’s best interest.
What is joint custody? It is the sharing of parenting-time each parent has with the children; sharing responsibility in the children’s lives; having each parent contribute to the decision making process concerning the best interests of the children. Joint custody does not mean that the children live in two different places during the course of their minority. Generally speaking, there is one residential custodial parent and a non-residential custodial parent. Instead of one parent getting visitation with the children and the other parents having custody, each parent has parenting time with the children.
Parents Not Friends
Children need their parents. A parent’s responsibility is to educate their children, support their children and love their children. Sometimes parents have to take a tough line with their children to see to it they become responsible, law abiding, appropriate human beings. Tough love can be difficult but sometimes it is necessary in child rearing. Parents must distinguish themselves from the children’s friends.
Residential Custody and Child Support
In joint custody situations, as indicated earlier, one parent acts as the residential custodial parent. It is important to establish a specific residence for a child so the child will be allowed to register in his or her local school district. However, even if the parents have virtually equal parenting time with the child or children, the non-residential custodial parent has an obligation to pay child support to the residential custodial parent. There are times that this is unfair! However, the law to New York requires the non-residential custodial parent to pay child support to the residential custodial parent even if the non-residential custodial parent has the same or similar expenses for the child as the residential custodial parent.
The best interest of the child is a fairly general term. Both mothers and fathers have equal rights to custody in New York. If the parents both want custody of the child, joint custody of the child may be a solution in many cases.
November 27th, 2012
Justice Matthew Cooper, sitting in Supreme Court, New York County, granted an application in the matter of Castaneda v. Castaneda, for a change in venue in a divorce proceeding from Manhattan to Suffolk County. The wife in this case brought an application claiming that the venueing of the case in Manhattan was improper. She resided in Suffolk County. Her husband resided in Queens County.
Justice Cooper, in his decision, wrote “that it appears to become an accepted practice for ‘so called divorce mills’ to file divorce actions in New York County even when neither of the spouses actually live in the county.” He presumed that they took this action because New York County processed divorces faster than other counties.
Wife In Suffolk County And Husband In Queens County
Justice Cooper in his decision stated that since the wife lived in Suffolk County and the husband lived in Queens County, New York County could not be the proper venue for the divorce proceeding. He granted the wife’s application to change venue. The Court stated the legislature should amend the New York Civil Practice Laws and Rules to require parties in divorce proceedings to file the proceedings in the county in which they reside in unless there were special circumstances shown. In the alternative, he suggested trial Judges be given the discretion on their own to transfer cases to the proper county the case should be heard in.
Divorce mills refer to attorneys that do high volume allegedly simple divorces often assuming the issues involving custody, child support, spousal maintenance and other significant issues have been resolved and therefore the parties just need a change in their status. This is not always the case. In many situations the alleged uncontested divorces often fall apart and contested litigation proceedings are necessary.
July 31st, 2012
When a custodial parent seeks to relocate, he or she may run into more complications and difficulties than he or she anticipates. An order of custody and/or divorce judgment may contain clauses specifically preventing a custodial parent from relocating. Whether the custody order or the divorce judgment contains a clause of this nature, the custodial parent, who seeks to relocate, must bring a proceeding in the State of New York, either in the Supreme Court or in the Family Court. The proceeding will be for the purpose of obtaining a court order authorizing the relocation of the custodial parent.
Good Reasons For Relocating
The application brought by the custodial parent must contain a compelling reason for relocating with the child or children. Some of the reasons that have been alleged in petitions of this nature deal with employment in another locality, it is closer to family members for a support system and opportunities for the children to enhance their education.
The Impact On The Non-Custodial Parent
In most situations, the relocation of the children will have a negative impact on the non-custodial parent’s visitation rights. To compensate, the non-custodial parent is often offered additional parenting time. Additional parenting time can involve summer vacations, school vacations, school recesses and other periods of time when school isn’t in session. In some situations, the parent who seeks to relocate may have the obligation of paying the cost of transportation of the children back to visit with the non-custodial parent.
Courts in the State of New York are reluctant to grant relocation applications due to the negative impact it can have on the other parent’s visitation rights. To be successful in New York it is extremely important to show the relocation will be in the children’s best interest. To accomplish this goal it will be necessary to show how the children’s lives will be enhanced either economically or in another manner.
Present A Plan to the Court
If you seek to relocate it is important to present, in your court petition, a plan for visitation with the non-custodial parent. This plan must show the children will be able to maintain their relationship with the non-custodial parent. Since the party bringing the application will have the burden of proof, it is essential in the proceeding to be represented by an experienced family law attorney who has previously dealt with relocation cases before the local courts in your jurisdiction.
July 23rd, 2012
California is considering passing a multiple parenting law. This law would allow children to legally have more than two parents. This statute was proposed by State Senator Mark Leno of San Francisco. It has already passed the California State Senate and is being considered in the California State Assembly.
Mr. Leno claims that the definition of the American family is evolving. The statute takes into consideration surrogacy arrangements and reproductive techniques that involve multiple individuals and same sex marriages. Mr. Leno has stated “the bill brings California into the 21st century recognizing there are more than Ozzie and Harriett families today.”
Mr. Leno, in an interview with ABC News.com, discussed a situation when an appeals court in 2009 placed a girl in foster care when her legally married parents, who were two lesbians, could not care for her. One of the child’s mothers had been jailed. The other, non biological mother was in a hospital facility. The girl’s biological father fought to be recognized as a parent. She had a relationship with the father, but the court could not recognize him as a parent because she already had two recognized parents. Mr. Leno points out that Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maine and the District of Columbia already have statutes recognizing more than two parents
Statute Deals With More Than Same Sex Relationships
Mr. Leno argues with regard to the new law, that it is more inclusive than just involving same sex relationships. He uses as an example in which a man raises a non-biological child with a woman when the child also has a relationship with his biological father. Another example he gives is when a lesbian couple wants to include a male friend who provided sperm for conception as a legal parent for the child. Leno strongly argues it is in the child’s best interest to designate multiple parents to provide financial support, health insurance and other state benefits.
Legal experts are concerned about the issues that would be created by this new California law. Issues involving tax deductions, child support, health insurance, inheritance rights, custody issues, visitation issues, child support and wrongful death situations could be significantly impacted by the situation where a child has three parents.
April 24th, 2012
Justice Palmieri in the Supreme Court located in Nassau County, New York, has rendered an unusual decision in a divorce case. Divorce Law in New York does not make fault a factor in equitable distribution of assets unless there is “egregious marital fault.” In this case, the wife’s husband of ten years had been convicted of sexually molesting her eight year old granddaughter from another marriage. The attorney for the wife sought to make an inquiry with the husband with regard to his conduct being a potential factor in the equitable distribution of the property. The husband’s attorney brought a protective order application alleging that this conduct is not material to the equitable distribution of assets.
Sexual Abuse Is Egregious Fault
Judge Palmieri, in his decision, stated “it cannot be seriously argued that this could never be a sufficient basis…for finding ‘outrageous’ or ‘conscious shocking’ conduct no matter what disclosure of the underlying facts might reveal.” He therefore, allowed the discovery of material to develop the facts in this situation.
Mrs. G stated that after her husband was convicted she had a nervous breakdown. She was forced to take medication which prevented her from functioning properly. She needed therapy, but could not continue with the therapy because her husband refused to pay for the treatment.
Judge Palmieri in his decision stated “notwithstanding the plea, no trial Court can fairly determine whether the defendant’s conduct was sufficiently outrageous or conscious shocking to affect equitable distribution on a conviction alone.” This is due to the fact plea bargains are often the result of negotiations in which various factors come into play. The judge went on further to say “the issue is his conduct and the effect on the plaintiff and his alleged victims cannot be used as shields.”
Judge Palmieri has deviated from the established law with regard to allowing fault to be taken into consideration in the equitable distribution of assets. I presume this case will be appealed. It is my expectation that it will be reversed by the Appellate Division.
Sometimes when fathers come into Court, they find the playing field is not level. The Family Court is often referred to as “mommy’s court.” However, there is a way to level the playing field and that is to hire the most experienced, most competent aggressive fathers’ rights lawyers available.
The attorneys of the Law Offices of Elliot Schlissel are recognized throughout the metropolitan New York area as the premiere father’s rights lawyers. We litigate issues involving divorces, child custody, visitation, changing child custody, child support, child abuse, child neglect, annulments, parental alienation cases, as well as orders of protections. Call us for a free consultation at 1-800-344-6431, 516-561-6645, 718-350-2802.
December 2nd, 2011
State University of New York (SUNY)
SUNY schools or the cost of sending the children to the most expensive SUNY school.
The SUNY CAP In Case Law
resources in the hundreds of thousands of dollars. Although the mother was willing to pay for half of the cost of sending one of her sons to Syracuse University, the father was not. He only wished to pay half of the expense to send his son to the State University of New York at Binghamton.
Fathers who come to our law office often claim that they are treated like second class citizens in the Family Court regarding child custody, visitation, child support, spousal maintenance (alimony), orders of protection and issues involving child abuse and child neglect. They also relate to us that in divorce proceedings in the Supreme Court they are not treated fairly. Our law office represents fathers with regard to all types of proceedings in the Family Court and the Supreme Court. We aggressively protect fathers’ rights. We deal with difficult issues, such as downward modifications of child support, relocation problems, parental alienation cases and issues involving parental alienation syndrome. For more than 33 years, we have been recognized as one of the premier fathers’ rights law firms in the Metropolitan New York area. If you have matrimonial or family problems, we can help you. Call for a consultation at 1-800-344-6431, 516-561-6645 and 718-350-2802.
November 30th, 2011
There are many issues that come up in divorces. Who gets custody, child support, visitation (parenting schedules), equitable distribution of property and the payment of debts from the marriage. These issues can cause divorces to be contentious. Litigants in divorce cases spend large sums of money fighting to protect their rights concerning these problems.
If the parties to a marriage have children, how is the issue of college expenses dealt with? To start with, most litigants in a divorce will tell their attorney that their children are young and they don’t want to deal with the college expense issue now, that they’d prefer to wait until a later time. In those situations, the attorney should ask his clients how much they have saved up for college so far. The answer to that question is often either zero or a very small amount.
During settlement discussions on divorce issues, the parties often get together at one of the attorney’s offices and have a four party meeting. At this meeting, both spouses and their respective attorneys face each other across a conference room table and discuss, in a mature, intelligent, reasonable manner the issues involved in their divorce.
The purpose of these discussions is to try to work out an amicable settlement without the need for expensive litigation. When the issue of college tuition comes up, both of the spouses sometimes say they agree that we should pay for the college expenses for their children. Often the Attorney will inform them of something along the lines of: “well, your children are eight and ten, as of this point. You have saved very little towards their college expenses. Even though you seek to pay for your childrens’ college expenses, and this is admirable, since you haven’t saved money up until this point, it is unlikely that you will be able to save enough money to pay for the tuition in the future”
I have been representing men and women concerning issues involving divorce, divorce grounds and family law problems for more than 33 years. I have been involved in hundreds of cases dealing with issues concerning orders of protection, child custody, child abuse, child neglect, division of marital property and regarding negotiation and separation agreements. My law office protects mothers’ rights and fathers’ rights in divorce and family court situations. Should you have questions or seek a free consultation, call me at 1-800-344-6431, 516-561-6645 or 718-350-2802.
September 30th, 2011
Judge Dregger, sitting in Manhattan Supreme Court, denied a very successful private equity firm executive from presenting evidence in a divorce case that he had “unique personality traits” prior to the marriage that allowed him to accumulate 450 million dollars in business assets during the thirty year term of his marriage. Justice Dregger, in her decision, stated that “in purporting to prove that the success of the business is solely attributable to his innate genius, the expert opinion evidence offered by the husband provides no assistance to the finder of fact in fashioning an equitable distribution of the estate based on the contributions of each party to the marital partnership.” Mr. and Mrs. Silverman were married for more than thirty years prior to a divorce lawsuit being brought. They had married in January of 1978.
Mr. Silverman claimed that he had unique innate talents that allowed him to be successful in this business. Mr. Silverman argued that his talents in business should be considered in determining equitable distribution. Justice Dregger stated that intangible assets may be considered as marital property, referring to the enhanced earning capacity of an investment banker, someone with celebrity status or someone involved in a political career. However, she stated the question is “to what degree the spouse not possessed of the intangible asset was entitled to a distributive aware arising from the enhanced earning capacity of the career developed during the marriage and not the degree of fame, skill or political acumen possessed at the time of the marriage.”
Henry Silverman is out of luck. The 450 million dollars he amassed is subject to equitable distribution with his wife. I’m sure he’ll end up with enough money to prevent himself from starving.
The law office of Elliot Schlissel have been handling divorces in the Metropolitan New York area for over thirty-three years. We litigate all aspects of divorce related proceedings in the Supreme Court and Family Court. These proceedings involve divorce grounds, no fault divorce, child custody, mothers’ rights, fathers’ rights, child support, downward modification of child support, spousal maintenance (alimony) and domestic violence issues. In addition, we negotiate separation agreements, prenuptial agreementsand post-nuptial agreements for our clients. We litigate equitable distribution issues involving doctor, dentist and lawyer licenses. Call us for a free consultation.
July 29th, 2011
Kathleen Scott-Gonzalez appeared in court for a hearing on her divorce in Plantation, Florida. She expected this to be the final day of the trial on her divorce case. What she didn’t anticipate was that she would be beaten up by her husband in the judge’s chambers and end up with a broken nose and fractured jaw!
Kathleen and her husband Paul Gonzalez were in Judge Rothschild’s chambers. A hearing was underway concerning the issue of child support. Paul Gonzalez was acting as his own attorney. Both Paul Gonzalez and his wife Kathleen are ex marines.
Judge Rothschild was talking about child support. At that time Paul Gonzalez stood up and left the room. Judge Rothschild invited both litigants into his chambers to discuss the matter. When Paul Gonzalez entered Judge Rothschild’s chambers, he started punching his wife. He was behind her and started punching her in the back of her head. Unfortunately, there was no court officer in the room to prevent the assault. Both Judge Rothschild and Kathleen Gonzalez’s lawyer helped stop the beating. Eventually court officers came in to the room and subdued Mr. Gonzalez.
Paul Gonzalez has been charged with felony battery and resisting arrest. He is currently spending his time in the Brownwood County jail. His bail has been set at one million dollars.
Kathleen Gonzalez advises men and women if they are afraid their spouse, even in a court setting, they should ask the court for additional security. Kathleen Gonzalez thought she was safe in court. In the case of her divorce, she wasn’t!
Fathers should never represent themselves in a divorce. They should have knowledgeable father’s rights lawyers by their side at all times during matrimonial or family court proceedings.
The attorneys at the father’s rights Law Firm of Elliot Schlissel have extensive experience in dealing with issues involving paternity, child custody, orders of protection, child visitation and child support. We represent fathers wrongly accused of child abuse and child neglect by CPS and ACS. We deal with the attorneys for the child also in these proceedings. When fathers are downsized or lose their jobs, we bring applications to reduce their child support.
Our law office has extensive experience in dealing with parental relocation problems (when one parent moves), grandparent’s rights and equitable distribution of assets in a divorce. Our attorneys represent men in the Supreme Courts and Family Courts of Nassau County, Queens County, Kings County and throughout the rest of the Metropolitan New York area. Call for a free consultation.