Live chat- online now

We are here to assist you. Chat with us now.

Chat Banner

Can We Help You?

Menu
Squarebtn

contact us today

516-561-6645 718-350-2802 631-319-8262

free consultation

Mother Allowed to Relocate With Child To Florida

custody and visitation attorneyA proceeding was brought by a mother, JL in Nassau County Supreme Court before Supreme Court Justice Jeffrey Goodstein regarding relocating with her child to Florida. She requested the father’s existing visitation schedule with their child be modified.

The Custody Agreement

The parties had entered into a custody agreement which provided the mother with both residential and legal custody. A hearing was held and the mother testified the father exercised only minimal visitation with the child, spending only sixteen hours a month with the child. In addition, she claimed the father was $100,000 behind in his child support payments.

The Judge’s Decision

Justice Goodstein granted the mother’s request to relocate to Florida. In his decision he noted the father only spent sixteen hours a month with the child and the father did not engage in overnight or midweek visits with the child. In his decision he stated that based on the evidence, the child’s education and child care issues could be resolved if the mother moved to Florida where she had a family support system. In the end Justice Goodstein found the relocation of the mother and the child to Florida would be in the child’s best interest. He went on further to rule the father was entitled to both telephone, Skype and facetime contact with the child. However, it would be his responsibility to initiate such contact. In addition, all of the child’s expenses to fly to and from New York to visit with the father would be the mother’s sole responsibility.family law attorney

What Can You Do When the Custodial Parent Wants To Relocate With Your Children?

family law advocates and custodial parent relocationWhen the custodial parent wants to relocate, he or she should bring an application to either the Family Court or the Supreme Court in the State of New York, to get the court’s permission to move away. In a perfect world, when this happens, you oppose the move and show it is not in the children’s best interest to relocate with the custodial parent.

However, in the real world, sometimes the non-custodial parent simply finds out the custodial parent seeks to move. In these situations, it is usually in the non-custodial parent’s best interest to be proactive. He or she should immediately bring a proceeding to get a court order to stop the custodial parent from relocating. In cases where the custodial parent violates these court orders, the courts can change custody. When making an argument against the relocation of the custodial parent, you must show this would be a significant change in circumstances, it would disrupt the children’s lives and routines, put them in a different school, and interfere with your ability to visit and maintain a loving relationship with your children.

Why Custodial Parents Move

There are a variety of reasons why the custodial parent might decide to relocate. He or she may obtain a job transfer or they may have lost their job and have the ability to obtain a job in another state.

Attorney for the Child

Relocation cases can have a negative impact on the children involved. In most cases, the court will appoint an attorney to represent the children. In those cases, the non-custodial parent must show to the attorney for the children as well as to the court it is not in the best interest of the child to be relocated. It is necessary to bring a proceeding seeking an order from the court preventing the custodial parent from moving with the children.assistance in family court and with custody litigation

Governor Cuomo Slashes NY Judiciary Budget by $170 Million

cuomo-150x150

It is estimated that hundreds of non-judicial workers will lose their jobs related to an additional $70 million dollars in budget cuts from the judiciary budget in the state of New York. The $70 million in budget cuts is in addition to a previous $100 million that was cut from the $2.7 billion budget for the judiciary in the state of New York.

Judge Lipman, the Chief Judge in New York State, has not specifically identified who will be laid off as of this date. There are concerns that court houses will be closed due to these budget cuts. Judge Lipman claims that this will not happen and that the court houses will remain open.

Court Administrators Fight Layoffs

Court administrators fought to avoid significant layoffs. They had hoped the courts reduced budget requirements could be met by instituting an early retirement program, eliminating new hirees, and other economic concessions, such as the elimination of Judicial Hearing Officers. The $170 million cut represents 6.3% of the judiciary budget. There are currently 15,200 non-judicial workers employed by the court system in the state of New York. Rocco Desantis is the president of the New York State Court Clerks Association. In a recent interview, he indicated that the court system was already strained from early retirement and previous budget cuts. He stated, “as a result of positions left unfulfilled from early retirement, there are already long lines at every office that deal with the public and back offices.” He stated, “I am concerned that this is going to make a bad situation worse.”

John Strand of the New York State Court Officers Association recently stated that the projected courthouse cuts will have a severe impact on the operation of court facilities. He doesn’t see how all the current court parts can be kept open with a reduced staff of court officers.

James F.X. Doyle is the President of the New York State County Court Judges Association. In a recent interview, he claimed that there will be inadequate security in the court houses due these layoffs.

Cuts In Court Personnel Unacceptable

The judiciary has traditionally been the poor man in the three branches of government in New York. Judges in New York state have not received a salary increase in more than thirteen years. They’re the poorest paid judges in the United States of America. When you consider that some of these judges live in the most expensive counties in the United States, it helps to explain the horrific conditions that exist in our legal system. The further layoffs of court personnel due to budget cuts will cause our legal system to grind more slowly. Justice delayed is justice denied! The budget cuts forced upon the judiciary by Governor Cuomo are unfair and will have a negative effect on the quality of the legal system in the state of New York!

Fathers’ Rights Lawyer

The legal system is supposed to be gender neutral. Many men involved with litigating matrimonial and family law matters have walked away from the legal system because their rights were not protected and they felt the system was biased against them.

We are fathers’ rights lawyers. We represent fathers in the negotiation of separation agreements. We deal with relocation problems when the custodial parent moves, creating a problem with the father’s visitation. We deal with parental alienation syndrome and the parental alienation by one parent of the other parent to the children. We litigate high net worth divorces and all aspects of equitable distribution in divorce cases. We help our clients obtain divorces under the new no-fault divorce law in the state of New York. We specifically assist fathers in litigating child abuse charges, paternity, spousal maintenance (alimony), child abuse, child neglect, child custody, child visitationorders of protection and all other issues litigated in divorces in the Supreme Court. If you’re a father and you’ve have concerns concerning your rights being protected, feel free to call us at 1-800-344-6431, 516-561-6645 or 718-350-2802.

Father in Jail Trumps Custody Order. Mother can Leave the State.

father1-150x1502Last March, Judge Posner, sitting in the Family Court of Duchess County, ruled that a woman whose ex-husband had been in and out of jail since approximately 2003, and in addition had alcohol related problems, could leave the state with her nine-year-old son. She could take this action in spite of the fact that she had signed a custody order barring her from removing the child more than 25 miles from her residence without giving ninety days notice to the father.

Mother Wants to Move to North Carolina

The mother was a nurse. She wanted to relocate to North Carolina. She had a support system in North Carolina. Her parents were there. She felt moving to North Carolina would improve her financial condition and allow her to spend more time with her son.

She brought a proceeding before family court Judge Posner in Dutchess County. She claimed that she had an untenable financial situation. The father had not participated in raising the child or supporting the child since 2006. Judge Posner took into consideration the father’s long periods related to his incarceration. He also stated that he had failed to support his son or be involved in his son’s life. In her application, Mom advised the judge that relocating would allow her to work less hours and earn a similar salary, and spend more quality time with her son.

Relocation Issues

It was the father’s contention that the mother did not present sufficient evidence to support her position. Although the father didn’t deny his alcohol problems and incarceration had kept him away from his son, he expressed a desire to maintain a relationship with his son.

Best Interests of the Child

Judge Posner ruled that the mother had shown, by a preponderance of the evidence, that her relocation would be in the best interest of the child and therefore she was justified in modifying the custody agreement. The Judge also stated he was “confident” the mother, if permitted to move, “will take steps to encourage a meaningful relationship” between the father and his son.

The attorney for the mother was interviewed after the decision. She stated, “that this ruling stands for the proposition that having an addiction isn’t an excuse for failure to observe your parental obligations.”

father2-150x131

Long Island Fathers’ Rights Lawyers

Fathers have rights that need to be protected. Cases involving child abuse and child neglect are sometimes brought as a cover to obtain custody for the mother. Child Protective Services and Administration for Children’s Services problems can have an impact on a father obtaining custody or visitation with his child. Fathers who are paying child support and are downsized need representation to reduce their child support obligations. Children can be turned away from their fathers due to parental alienation syndrome caused by one parent alienating the child from the other parent by bad mouthing the other parent in the child’s presence. Issues involving paternity, child support and child visitation also acquire aggressive representation. Feel free to call our law office for a free consultation.

When Do You Get the Engagement Ring Back?

ringIn a case this past summer, Justice Dickerson, a Supreme Court Judge sitting in Rockland County, New York, ordered a Hassidic woman to return a hundred-thousand dollar engagement ring to her betrothed. The man claimed he didn’t know when he gave her the ring at a religious wedding ceremony that she was still married to someone else. The woman appealed this decision. The Appellate Division of the Second Department held that this was a question of fact as to whether he knew she was married or not and it should have been decided after a trial, not on a motion for summary judgment. New York Civil Rights law section 80-b deals with the return of engagement rings. Larry Lipschultz gave his fiancee, Nadia Kinderman, a six carrot diamond ring in the summer of 2006. Thereafter, the Hassidic couple were married in an Orthodox Jewish wedding ceremony. Thereafter Mr. Lipschultz learned that his wife never obtained a civil divorce from her first husband. To say he was unhappy about this would be an understatement. They separated on September 13, 2007, less then a year after they were married. Mr. Libschultz thereafter filed an action demanding either $150,000 in cash or the return of the ring. He claimed that, under New York Civil Rights Law section 80-b, he was entitled to the recovery of the ring given as an engagement present on the basis of being in consideration for marriage.  His wife claimed he knew all along she was still married and therefore she should be entitled to keep the ring. The issue presented was whether he knew that she was not legally divorced. If he had knowledge of this, then the court could be justified in allowing his wife to keep the ring. The moral to this story is don’t buy a six carrot, $100,000 to $150,000 engagement ring. Two carrots would have been more than enough!

ring1

Fathers’ Rights Lawyer

We negotiate pre-nuptial and post-nuptial agreements for our client. In cases where our clients are professionals, have assets or have been previously married, we aggressively litigate all issues dealing with our clients’ high net worth statuses. We also deal with obtaining child custody for our clients. When our clients solely seek visitation, we see to it that they have liberal visitation. Child support and spousal maintenance issues (alimony) are significant issues that must be dealt with in all divorces. We see to that our clients’ rights are protected concerning these issues. Should allegations of domestic violence arise, we very aggressively litigate these issues and protect our clients’ rights and privileges. We also deal with issues concerning paternity, relocation problems, parental alienation and parental alienation syndrome issues. We also try to avoid litigation and negotiate separation agreements for our clients. Sometimes grandparents are cut off in divorces. In these cases, we litigate grandparents’ rights issues for our clients. Call us for a free consultation.

Mother’s Request to Relocate Her Child Denied

This past summer, Justice Falanga, a Supreme Court Judge sitting in Nassau County, made a ruling that despite a child’s wishes, the relocation of the child with the mother to Michigan was denied. The wife decided to relocate from New York to Michigan. She had residential custody of the parties’ children. The father brought a proceeding for custody of the parties youngest child. He took this action in spite of the fact that the child had specifically expressed her desire to move to Michigan with her mother.

Dad Asks For Custody

Dad argued that the custody change was not in the child’s best interest. Justice Falanga decided that this was not a typical relocation case. Instead, he felt it was an application for change of custody resulting in the relocation of the child to another state.

The judge stated in his decision that the wife had the burden of demonstrating that the child’s best interest would be served by this relocation to Michigan, and by the changing of the residential custody from the father to the mother. The court noted that under child modification principles, the wife had established that she believed the child would be happier if she was allowed to reside with her in Michigan. However, she did not prove such change in circumstances would be in the child’s best interest.

The court also took into consideration the fact that the father had made diligent sustained efforts to develop the child’s relationship with his wife. The court ruled that he was the parent best able to provide for the child’s emotional, intellectual and social development. The judge further stated in his opinion that he could provide a more secure standard of living and financial future for the child.

In this case, a father’s rights were protected by the court. Thank you, Judge Falanga!

father2-150x105

New York Fathers’ Rights Lawyer

Fathers need to have their rights protected. Important issues in matrimonial law involving divorce, fathers’ rights, orders of protection, child custody, child visitation, child support, spousal maintenance (alimony), child abuse, child neglect, paternity, equitable distribution and relocation problems require experienced, dedicated fathers’ rights attorneys. We also represent fathers concerning issues involving parental alienation, parental alienation syndrome and paternity. Should you be presented with one of these issues, please feel free to call us.

Paternity by Estoppel: Can This Really Happen?

support-150x150Paternity by Estoppel is a legal doctrine that is now accepted by the New York State Court of Appeals.  This doctrine holds that a man can be required to pay child support for a child if it is proven beyond any doubt that he is NOT the biological father of this child.

In the matter of Shondel v. Mark D., the New York State Court of Appeals held as follows:

“In this child support proceeding, we hold that a man who has mistakenly represented himself as a child’s father may be estopped from denying paternity, and made to pay child support, when the child justifiably relied on the man’s representation of paternity, to the child’s detriment.  We reached this conclusion based on the best interest of the child as set forth by the legislature.”

In the aforementioned case, the father of the child had seen the child approximately four times during the child’s life.  However, he had held himself out to be the child’s father.  He had provided the child with financial support.  He had also signed an affidavit authorizing the child to use his name.

The New York State of Appeals rendered a decision that this man’s actions caused the child to justifiably rely on these representations that he was the child’s father.  The court further reasoned that it was now in the child’s best interest to prevent the father from denying the paternity, even though the DNA proved beyond question that this man was not the child’s father. Therefore, this man was forced to continue to pay child support for a child that was not his.

Paternity by Estoppel

This case and subsequent cases should be a warning to all men.  If you are not absolutely certain you are the father of a child, you should demand a DNA paternity test.  You should not sign an acknowledgment of paternity unless you are absolutely sure you are the father of the child.

If you undertake to provide support for a child, visit with a child or hold yourself out as being the father of a child, should you later find that you are not the biological father of the child, you will be estopped (prevented) from making this argument in court.

child-150x1505

Mens’ Rights/Fathers’ Rights Attorneys

Men need advocates in court.  Both fathers and men who find themselves in the Family Court and/or the Supreme Court sometimes run into a hornets’ nest.  The system, in many situations, favors mothers and women.

The Fathers’ Rights defense lawyers at the Law Offices of Schlissel DeCorpo litigate issues involving paternity, child support, spousal maintenance (alimony), visitation rights, relocation issues, as well as Orders of Protection and child abuse and child neglect allegations.   We handle all aspects of representing fathers concerning their rights and responsibilities in divorces, equitable distribution of their assets and issues involving parental alienation.  We negotiate separation agreements and we try to amicably resolve our cases whenever it is possible.  Feel free to call us at 1-800-344-6431; 516-561-6645 or 718-350-2802.

Mother Can Relocate As Long As She “Skypes”

skype2-videocall-150x150James and Debra Baker were married in the year 2000. Their Marriage lasted until 2008, when they were divorced. They have two children, a six year old daughter and a nine year old son.

The Bakers’ home recently went into foreclosure. Mrs. Baker had lost her job as a bookkeeper. Mr. Baker, a construction worker, has a take home pay of only $600 a month.

Mrs. Baker brought a proceeding in Suffolk County court before Supreme Court Judge Jerry Garguilo, requesting that she be allowed to move to Venice Beach, Florida, so she could live with her parents. It was her hope that she could obtain full-time employment in Florida.

Skype Visitation:

Judge Garguilo conducted a two-day trial with regard to the proceeding. Judge Garguilo rendered a decision granting Mrs. Baker’s petition that she facilitate visitation by using SKYPE. In fact, the relocation was conditioned on Mrs. Baker having a computer and maintaining SKYPE capability. When Judge Garguilo authorized Mrs. Baker to move, he made it conditional on the children being available three times to communicate with their father through SKYPE.

This is a very innovative way of dealing with a relocation issue. Perhaps if the mother had greater financial resources, she would also be responsible for providing the children with round-trip airfare to facilitate in-person visitation with the father.

Should you have visitation or relocation questions or issues, call us at 1-800-344-6431, or contact us by email.

  • banner-changes
  • image5
  • image6
  • image7