July 30th, 2012
Carl M. Perry had an order of protection against him. This order of protection from the Family Court in Monroe County indicated he was to have no contact with his wife. It further ordered, he was to stay away from his wife.
During the period of the order of protection, Carl gained access to his wife’s Facebook account. He sent out letters to friends and family on his wife’s friends and family list. In these letters he complained that his wife was using the parties children against him. He further indicated that she was preventing him from seeing or communicating with his children. Mr. Perry was charged with criminal contempt for violating the order of protection that barred him from having contact with his wife.
Justice DiSalvo, sitting in the Webster Town court, dismissed the criminal charges against him. The Justice stated in his decision “changes in technology, including the way people communicate, continue to present unique challenges to the courts. As of the date (April 7th) of this decision there were no reported cases of people charged with violating an order of protection for accessing Facebook. One must look for cases where defendants are charged for indirectly contact a protected person by making statements to others.” The court further held, that there was nothing in the order of protection that prevented him from accessing the Facebook account.
The court held that by communicating with individuals through Facebook he was not either directly or indirectly trying to contact Ms. Perry. The court further stated, the order of protection did not prevent the defendant from having contact with individuals that happen to be listed on Ms. Perry’s Facebook account. It also did not prevent him from having contact with family, friends or acquaintances.
This is a win for Facebook. If you have an order of protection against you can still communicate with third parties through Facebook provided the order of protection doesn’t specifically mention no contact through Facebook accounts.
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.
February 3rd, 2012
In a paternity by estoppel situation a man who is not the biological father of a child can be forced to pay child support. In the matter of Shondel J. v. Mark D., 7 N.Y. 3D 330, 853 NE 2d 610, 820 NYS 2d 199, 206 NYSlop op.05238 the New York State Court of Appeals held in a child support proceeding a man who had mistakenly represented himself as the child’s father could be estopped (stopped) from denying paternity. In this case the child justifiably relied on the man’s representation of paternity. This is true even though DNA testing showed the man was not the actual father of the child. The court reached this conclusion based on the best interest of the child.
Dilemma For Men Who Support Children
There is a dilemma for men who seek to help children. Imagine a case where a man seeks to help support his girlfriend’s child. He pays periodic child support. Thereafter he breaks up with the girlfriend. She brings a proceeding in the Family Court requesting he be forced to pay child support. She can allege in the suit that by paying the child support in the past he represented he was acting as the child’s father. The man could ask for DNA testing which would show that he is not the biological father of the child. When the case becomes before the Judge, the Judge can stop him from presenting evidence that he is not the actual biological father of the child because it would be in the child’s best interest to have a relationship with a father figure. It’s in the child’s best interest that money be received by the mother to help support the child. Is this justice? In the writer’s opinion, it is very questionable. No!
If you are helping to support a child that is not yours, be careful. Should your relationship with the mother end, you may be forced to make involuntary child support payments, even if you are not the biological father of the child.
The Law Offices of Elliot Schlissel is well known for protecting father’s rights throughout the Metropolitan New York area courts. Our law firm has extensive experience in representing fathers with regard to all types of Supreme Court and Family Court proceedings. We represent fathers with regard to all aspects of divorce and all divorce related issues, such as child custody, child visitation, child support, spousal maintenance (alimony), equitable distribution of property and a negotiation of separation agreements.
In situations where the fathers are alleged to have acted inappropriately concerning their spouse, girlfriends or children, we represent fathers in dealing with orders of protection, child abuse and child neglect proceedings, Child Protective Services (CPS) and Association for Children Services (ACS) proceedings as well as issues involving paternity. We also have extensive experience in obtaining annulments for fathers, reducing child support and dealing with parental alienation situations where mothers turn the children against fathers. Call us for a free consultation at 1-800-344-6431, 516-561-6645 or 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.
July 26th, 2011
Divorce rates for women in the military is double the divorce rate for men in the military. Approximately 8% of the women in the Armed Services of the United States obtained a divorce in 2010. Only 3% of the men in the military were divorced in that year. Dr. Benjamin Carney, a psychology professor at UCLA, conducted a study of divorce rates among military families between 1996 and 2005. This study showed that divorce rates for women in the military were 2 to 3 times higher than divorce rates for men. Dr. Carney has two theories as to why the divorce rates for women are higher. First is that the Armed Services are designed for military families that have civilian wives. The Armed Services is not designed to deal with families where the husband is the civilian. Marriages between men, who are in civilian life and women who have military careers have the highest potential of ending in a divorce. Men who have chosen military careers have civilian wives in 90% of the marriages. However, women in the military have a majority of spouses that are also in the military service. Professor Carney also sees gender role reversals as an additional reason for the disparity between the divorce rates for men and women in the Armed Services.
Conclusion: If the Armed Services is going to be a more attractive place for women, action must be taken to help them maintain and keep their marriages going.
New York and Long Island Divorce Lawyers
The Law Office of Elliot Schlissel handles all types of divorces. We represent individuals in the service as well as men and women in civilian life. We litigate divorce issues involving divorce grounds and family law related matters. We represent our clients concerning orders of protection, child custody, child abuse and child neglect matters. We negotiate separation agreements, pre nuptial and post nuptial agreements on behalf of our clients. We litigate issues involving mother’s rights and father’s rights. We help our clients deal with the division of property in divorces and we also work towards amicable resolution of divorce issues. Feel free to call us for a free consultation
July 22nd, 2011
Halle Berry was married to Gabriel Aubry. They have a daughter named Nahia. Halle Berry is an oscar winning actress. She has been engaged in a custody fight over her two year old daughter Nahia.
Halle has dropped out of a broadway play due to custody issues. She had been scheduled to make her broadway debut in September. The play was called the Mountain Top. Samuel L. Jackson is portraying Dr. Martin Luther King in the play. Halle was to portray a maid at the Lorraine Hotel in Memphis where King was the night before he was shot.
Nasty Custody Battle
Halle has been involved in a nasty custody battle with her ex partner Gabriel Aubry. The couple initially split up in 2010.
Halle Pulls Out of Movie Entitled New Year’s Eve
Halle Berry has also dropped out of a movie entitled New Year’s Eve. She blamed her pending custody litigation involving her daughter for her dropping out of this film.
She has recently claimed she has been unable to amicably resolve her custody issues with the child’s father Gabriel. A representative for Halle Berry has stated “she has serious concerns for her daughter’s well being while in the care of her father for any extended period of time and is prepared to take all necessary steps to protect her.” Is the real issue that Nahia’s father Gabriel Aubry is the parent who spends the majority of the time meeting the child’s needs while Halle pursues her career. It appears that Gabriel spends a majority of the time taking care of this child, while Halle is off making movies and appearing in other productions.
Father’s Rights Lawyers in New York
Children have two parents, a father and a mother. Under New York Law they have equal rights to custody and visitation. We are father’s rights lawyers. We litigate issues on behalf of fathers involving divorce, orders of protection, child custody, child visitation, child support, spousal maintenance (alimony), child abuse defense, paternity, no fault divorce and issues involving attorneys fees in divorces. We also assist our clients in obtaining annulments and dealing with parental relocation problems. We negotiate separation agreements, pre nuptial and post nuptial agreements for our clients. We represent fathers in cases in Nassau County, Kings County, Queens County and the rest of the Metropolitan New York area. Call for a free consultation.
June 8th, 2011
New York City jails tape all phone calls made by prisoners, with the exception of calls to doctors and lawyers. Prosecutors have been using these tapes against these prisoners. More than 8,200 calls were taped last year in New York City jails. The largest number of taped phone calls were used in domestic violence cases.
Men charged with assaulting and beating their wives and girlfriends seem to be blabber mouths. “I need you to prepare the kids to start lying” was stated by one man to his girlfriend on one of these taped conversations. In another case, the prisoner told his girlfriend, “whatever you do, do not speak to the District Attorney.”
Scott Kesler, the Bureau Chief in the Queens District Attorney’s office, stated the records “revolutionized the way we were able to proceed against men in domestic violence cases.” Mr. Kesler stated that we now have to ability “to prove what we’ve always suspected, which is that defendants in domestic violence cases are in constant contact with their victims and they utilize the phone system to intimidate their victims and refuse to cooperate in their prosecution.”
In virtually all domestic violence cases, the abused individuals are given orders of protection preventing the abuser from having contact with them. These jail house calls are in violation of the court ordered orders of protection and constitute a crime in and of themselves. In one case in Kings County, the abuser called the victim 1,200 times while he was incarcerated. Sometimes the victims are so traumatized by these phone calls that they refuse to cooperate with the prosecutors. In these situations, the District Attorneys office can utilize the recordings to explain why the victims are refusing to testify.
In a case involving Mohammd Khan, who was charged with stabbing his wife in the head and shoulders with a meat cleaver, the wife testified she did not remember who her attacker was. The recordings showed that Mr. Khan had engaged in a campaign of coercion against his spouse. Prosecutors were able to introduce her statements made in the hospital during the course of the proceedings against Mr. Khan. Mr. Khan was convicted and eventually sentenced to 7 to 10 years in prison.
If you are arrested, it is generally not in your interest to speak about the alleged crime you have committed. The fathers’ rights lawyers at the law office of Elliot Schlissel represent fathers concerning the following matters related to divorces and family court proceedings: orders of protection; child custody; child visitation; child support; spousal maintenance (alimony); child abuse; child neglect; CPS and ACS cases; paternity and equitable distribution; negotiating separation agreements, pre-nuptial and post-nuptial agreements. Feel free to call us for a free consultation. We can protect your rights.
May 25th, 2011
New York City jails tape all phone calls made by prisoners with the exception of calls to doctors and lawyers. Prosecutors have been using these tapes against these prisoners. More than 8,200 calls were taped last year in New York City jails. The largest use of these taped calls comes in domestic violence cases.
Men charged with assaulting and beating their wives and girlfriends seem to blabber mouths. “I need you to prepare the kids to start lying” was stated by one man to his girlfriend on these taped conversations. In another case the prisoner told his girlfriend “whatever you do, do not speak to the District Attorney.”
Scott Kesler, the Bureau Chief in the Queens District Attorney’s office stated the recording “revolutionized the way we were able to proceed against men in domestic violence cases. Mr. Kesler stated that we now have to ability “to prove what we’ve always suspected which is that defendants in domestic violence cases are in constant contact with their victims and they utilize the phone system to intimidate their victims and refuse to cooperate in their prosecution.
Orders of Protection
In virtually all domestic violence cases the abused individuals are given orders of protection preventing the abuser from having contact with them. These jail house calls are violation of the court ordered orders of protection and constitutes a crime in and of themselves.
In one case in Kings County the abuser called the victim 1,200 times while he was incarcerated. Sometimes the victims are so traumatized by these phone calls they refuse
to cooperate with the prosecutors. In these situations the District Attorneys office utilized the recordings to explain why the victims are refusing to testify.
In a case involving Mohammd Khan, who was charged with stabbing his wife in the head and shoulders with a meat cleaver. The wife testified she did not remember who her attacker was. The recordings showed that Mr. Khan had engaged in a campaign of coercion against his spouse. They were able to introduce her statements made in the hospital during the course of the proceedings against Mr. Khan. Mr. Khan was convicted and eventually sentenced to 7 to 10 years in prison.
Fathers’ Rights Lawyers
If you were arrested it is generally not in your interest to speak about the alleged crime you have committed. The father’s rights lawyers at the law office of Elliot Schlissel in addition we represent fathers concerning the following matters related to divorces and family court proceedings: orders of protection; child custody; child visitation; child support; spousal maintenance (alimony); child abuse & child neglect; CPS and ACS cases; paternity and equitable distribution; negotiating separation agreements and pre-nuptial and postnuptial agreements. Feel free to call us for a free consultation. We can protect your rights.
May 25th, 2011
James C. was convicted in 2007 of patronizing under age prostitutes. As a result of this conviction, a Dutchess County Social Worker and Family Court Judge had him removed from his home in Poughkipsee for a period of three years.
James, he spent a year in jail. After spending a year in jail he plead guilty in New York County to second degree rape of a 14 year old. He also pleaded guilty to patronizing a seventeen year old prostitute. The Appellate Division (an Appeals Court) reversed the Family Court ruling in 2010 that prevented him from seeing his children. By that time his wife and four children had moved to Canada.
New York Court of Appeals
James C. told New York’s highest court that he did not present a danger to his children. He argued that the County Officials were mistaken when they reached a conclusion that allowing him to return home from jail would constitute child neglect by him and his wife.
James is currently waiting for a decision from the Court of Appeals as to whether he can see his children.
Fathers’ Rights Attorneys in New York
The law office of Elliot Schlissel have been protecting father’s rights for more than thirty years. We litigate divorce proceedings, orders of protection, child abuse and child neglect cases, ACS and CPS child abuse allegations and we actively litigate all types of child abuse defense work.
We also represent our clients in no-fault divorces, regarding paternity issues, child custody, child visitation, child support and spousal maintenance (alimony) issues. Feel free to call us for a free consultation.