Divorce, Child Custody Battles, and the Seal Beach, California Shooting Incident

At the time of this posting, while the reported details are still sketchy, it appears, based upon various news reports, that the tragic shooting and killing of eight people by a lone gunman at a Seal Beach, California beauty salon, Salon Meritage, may have been related to a child custody battle.  In short, based upon initial reports, it appears that a 42 year-old man, Scott DeKraai, who was arrested by police less than a mile away from the salon, had reportedly been engaged in a bitter child custody battle with a salon employee over their son.

Look, no one know if the initial news reports are true.  And naturally, no one should contest the fact that Mr. DeKraai is entitled to his fair day in court.  But it is also true, as this tragic incident may illustrate, and as every divorce lawyer knows, child custody battles can sometimes get ugly -- really ugly.  And sometimes, sadly, child custody disputes lead to violence.

Are there any solutions?  Perhaps we can consider that topic on another day.  But today, our thoughts and prayers go out to each of the victims of this tragedy and to each of their families.

Mother loses custody of her children - because she has breast cancer

Mother loses custody of her children - because she has breast cancer
By Daily Mail Reporter


Last updated at 7:05 PM on 9th May 2011

A woman with terminal breast cancer says she has lost custody of her children because doctors do not know how long she will live.


A judge ruled that 37-year-old Alaina Giordano, from Durham, North Carolina, must give up both her children to her estranged husband after she was diagnosed with stage four breast cancer.

The decision comes after a bitter legal battle that has included allegations of cheating and other domestic problems.

Mrs Giordano said she is ‘devastated’ and that her children are what gives her strength.

The mother-of-two was first diagnosed with cancer in 2007, but her condition has worsened as it has spread on her bones.

After their marriage fell apart, her husband Kane Snyder, 37, sought to gain full custody of their children Sofia, 11, and Bud, 5.

He asked the judge that the children be moved to live with him in Chicago, where he is working as a leadership associate at Sears.

Durham County Family Court judge Nancy Gordon ruled that Mr Snyder should get the children after a psychiatrist recommended that they should live with him because of the ‘deteriorating condition of the mother’s health’.

The ruling also noted that Mrs Giordano is not currently employed. She had been working as a freelance writer and editor.

‘On April 25, we went in to get the ruling, it was pretty shocking,’ said Mrs Giordano.

‘Anybody who knows me knows my children are my life,’ she told ABC News.

‘They are what give me strength and part of the reason I’m doing so well.’

On her campaign blog, she claimed: 'Because I have a cancer diagnosis, I have spent the last sixteen months in court defending myself from the attacks of my abusive husband who filed a lawsuit against me in Durham County, NC asking for full, permanent custody of our two children using the argument that I have a cancer diagnosis.

'He then chose to move to the Chicago area to take a job at Sears Holdings, Inc. leaving our children in my sole physical custody since August 2010.'

'How does a woman with no kids and who has never been married become a judge in family court?' she wrote on her blog.

'From some of the things that she wrote in the order, it is clear that she has no insight into motherhood, marriage or an intimate partner relationship.

'This judge is trying to use theory to make decisions upon which she has no practical experience. This is very dangerous.

'A mother would know better than to rip happy, well-adjusted children from their mother who has been their primary caregiver since conception and send them to a father who was a weekend dad at best.

Every child deserves better than a judge with no parenting experience.'

The ruling states that Mrs Giordano must hand over her children to her estranged husband on June 17.

Custody-Prompted Double-Murder

Man charged in execution-style murders of ex-wife and her father

Orange County prosecutors allege that he waited to shoot them at his Costa Mesa home just hours after losing custody of the couple's 7-year-old daughter, who was sent out for ice cream with his current wife.

By Lauren Williams and Robert J. Lopez, Los Angeles Times

May 6, 2011

A Costa Mesa man has been charged with the execution-style murders of his ex-wife and her father after allegedly waiting to kill them at his home just hours after she was awarded sole custody of their 7-year-old daughter.

The slayings shocked neighbors in the quiet residential neighborhood not far from South Coast Plaza, where prosecutors allege the gunman chased his victims into the street Tuesday evening as he reloaded his weapon and continued to fire as they lay bleeding on the ground.

Robert Lehmann, 36, was charged Wednesday with two counts of special circumstances murder with sentencing enhancements for using a weapon, lying in wait and committing multiple murders, according to the Orange County district attorney's office. He is scheduled to be arraigned June 24.

His ex-wife, Emily Ford, 32, who worked as a preschool aide at a nearby school, had arrived at Lehmann's home on Santa Clara Circle to pick up the child with her father, Russell Ford, 62. The mother had left her 3-month-old son, who is not Lehmann's child, in a car seat inside her vehicle.

Earlier in the day, Emily Ford had been awarded sole custody and sole decision-making powers regarding the education of her daughter after Lehmann failed to appear at a custody trial, according to records filed in Orange County Superior Court.

Lehmann was angry about the custody order and, before his ex-wife arrived, sent the daughter and his current wife out to buy an ice cream, prosecutors said. As he opened the door, he allegedly began shooting at Emily Ford and her father. They ran into the street, with Lehmann following them.

"Lehmann is accused of pursuing them outside and continuing to shoot," Dist. Atty. Tony Rackauckas said in a statement. "As Emily Ford and Russell Ford lay bleeding on the ground, Lehman is accused of reloading his firearm and executing the victims by shooting them repeatedly in the back and back of the head."

Shots streaked past the vehicle containing Emily Ford's baby and struck cars across the street, where parents had parked to pick up their children at a day-care center. No other injuries were reported.

Afterward, police cordoned off parts of Lehmann's modest, single-story house with yellow crime scene tape. A thin trail of blood had dried and was crusted on the path that led to the well-manicured lawn.

A brown truck parked in the driveway had the license plate "Dady ♥ AJ."

Marco Antonio Arroyo, who lives two homes away, said the family always seemed very happy.

Lehmann's daughter often played outside the home, Arroyo said, adding that her father was always very affectionate with her.

"I would have never imagined," Arroyo said. "Never! I never saw anything contrary. They always seemed happy."

The girl is a special-needs student who attends Sonora Elementary School in Costa Mesa, officials said.

Emily Ford was a special-education preschool instructional aide who worked with autistic children at Paularino Elementary School in Costa Mesa. She also waited tables part-time at Morton's steakhouse in Santa Ana, court records show.

Colleagues at the school described Ford as engaging and well liked by the staff.

"She was a wonderful, nice lady who always had a smile on her face," said Principal Stacy Lynne de Boom-Howard. "She was very happy with where her life was. She was in a very happy relationship."

Russell Ford was an educator with the Santa Ana Unified School District from 1978 to 2010.

Court records show that the custody battle began amicably when the couple separated in 2004 after 10 months of marriage. But tensions surfaced when Emily Ford wanted a divorce and was set to remarry in 2009, according to court documents filed by her attorney.

Lehmann worked for Hewlett-Packard Co. as a "solution architect," according to court papers, and grossed more than $13,000 a month.

In 2009, Ford alleged in the court filings, Lehmann threatened to stall the divorce unless she reached an agreement with him outside of court on custody and support issues.

The records show that Lehmann questioned Ford's parenting skills, saying that their daughter had gotten scratches while on the school playground,

In the end, the court sided with Ford and ordered her to pick up the daughter from Lehmann's house at 6 p.m. Tuesday — the same time she was killed.

lauren.williams@latimes.com

robert.lopez@latimes.com

Copyright © 2011, Los Angeles Times

Divorce, Judicial Discretion, and Square Rocks

On my desk, at The Goolsby Law Firm, LLC, located in Augusta, Georgia, sits this square rock!  (I guess that, technically, the rock would be considered a cube)!  What does a square rock have to do with a divorce-related blog?  Consider the following point.

Although family law judges generally follow guidelines which normally apply to most divorce or child custody cases, it is important to recognize that they also generally retain some discretion to deviate from the norm.  And there is a good reason for this judicial discretion.  Simply put, not all people and not all divorce cases are alike.  Just as most rocks are round, occasionally, you run across one that is square!  For instance, Georgia's child support guidelines might dictate that a parent should pay a certain prescribed amount of child support.  However, a judge is granted discretion to deviate from the prescribed amount if, for example, the parent is temporarily unemployed, or otherwise has lower income.

Frankly, as a divorce attorney, I am glad that judges retain some discretion to depart from the norm.  After all, not all of us rocks are round!  Don't you agree?

Japan and Child Abductions

How Did Japan Become a Haven for Child Abductions?
By Lucy Birmingham / Tokyo



UPDATED: 03/07/2011



Like any loving father, Christopher Savoie just wanted to do the best thing for his two kids. In August 2009, his Japanese ex-wife broke U.S. law and abducted their children from his home in Tennessee, moving them to Japan. But when Savoie went to get them weeks later, he was arrested. It didn't matter that he had legal custody in both countries; that she had violated a U.S. court order or that there was a U.S. warrant issued for her arrest. Nor did the fact that Savoie was a naturalized Japanese citizen and fluent in Japanese make a difference. After 18 days in jail, Savoie returned to the U.S. empty handed and broken hearted. A year and half has now passed, and he is still unable to see his son and daughter, now 10 and 8.

Despite all this, Savoie's ex-wife is beyond the reach of international law. Japan has not signed the Hague Convention on the Prevention of Child Abduction, an international accord adopted by 84 nations and aimed at returning abducted children back to the country from which they were taken. Along with an increasing number of international marriages and divorces, child abductions to Japan - the only G7 nation that has not signed the treaty - have been on the rise. In 2009, the State Department ranked Japan at the top of its list in reported abductions from the U.S. among non-signatory nations. "It is our understanding that no U.S. citizen child abducted to Japan has been returned to the United States," says Paul Fitzgerald, a U.S. Embassy official in Tokyo. The issue could tarnish U.S.-Japan relations; as Assistant Sec. of State Kurt Campbell told reporters during a trip to Tokyo in February, "The situation has to be resolved in order to ensure that the U.S.-Japan relations continue on such a positive course."

Japan's antiquated domestic family law complicates matters. In a Japanese divorce, child custody is awarded to only one parent - typically the mother. Visitation can be negotiated but there is no legal enforcement and agreements are often broken. In Japan, it's not unusual for the non-custodial parent to lose contact with their child, and domestic abductions, when they do occur, are often ignored by the police as a family matter. It's a devastating scenario for a growing number of fathers residing in Japan - both Japanese and foreign - who have few legal rights to see their children. "Clearly, the best legal scenario is for the children is to be here in the U.S. where each parent would be guaranteed visitation," writes Savoie by email.

International pressure for Japan to make a change has been mounting. Over the past year, several ambassadors from embassies in Tokyo have met with high-level government officials to urge Japan to sign the convention. A Japanese government panel was set up in January to study the pros and cons, but opposition remains firm at most levels. Japanese lawmakers are worried the Hague Convention does not properly take into account past cases of domestic abuse in demanding a child's repatriation, or a child's own right to choose where they live. "This is why Switzerland tried to amend the treaty, even though it is a signatory," explains Kensuke Ohnuki, a Tokyo attorney who has represented several women who have abducted children from foreign countries to Japan. "They failed. So instead, they made their own new law which enables the Swiss court to refuse the return of a child when it's against the child's will."

On Feb. 22, the Japan Bar Association issued similar Hague recommendations to the government, including a guarantee in domestic law that children not be returned to their country of residence if they had been subjected to abuse or violence. Left-behind parents, including Christopher Savoie, have said the recommendations are draconian and anti-joint custody, in part because abuse is both difficult to prove and is commonly cited as one of the main reasons for abduction.

One of Ohnuki's clients, who uses the alias Keiko, says she left the U.S. with her child because she discovered her husband was abusing their son. "There were no obvious physical marks so it would have been impossible to prove in court," Keiko explains tearfully. After consulting a therapist and an attorney in the U.S., she feared getting sole custody as a Japanese citizen would be nearly impossible. "When we were in Japan, my son told me he feels safe, far away from his father... I didn't really want to leave the U.S. I had a good job and many friends. But I wanted to do what was best for my son." Keiko is now one of about 50 members of the Safety Network for Guardians and Children, a support group for women who have abducted their children to Japan from various countries.

Finding a internationally recognized legal resolution to cases like Keiko's will not be easy. But in the meantime, Japanese mothers living abroad who have no intention of removing their children from their families are also beginning to be affected by the problem. Jeremy Morley, a U.S. attorney specializing in Japanese child abductions says that foreign courts are "increasingly ordering Japanese mothers living overseas not to take their children to Japan even for a family visit because of Japan's status as a renowned haven for international child abduction."

A winning diplomatic strategy will need teeth to make a difference for everyone involved. "The mantra now is 'Japan sign the Hague', but that's not enough," U.S. Rep. Chris Smith said during a recent trip to Tokyo. The Republican New Jersey congressman, who is also the chairman of a subcommittee overseeing human rights issues, is pushing for a bill that would establish an Office of International Child Abductions within the U.S. State Department to handle cases like these and discuss sanctions against uncooperative nations. "I don't know what the answer is," says Keiko. "But we need to find a solution that's in the best interest of the child."



Photo: Yoshikazu Tsuno / AFP / Getty Images

Divorce, Child Custody and Parent Selection

After several "entertaining" posts, maybe it is time for me to put on my Augusta, Georgia divorce attorney hat and give you some more "meat and potatoes," or practical tips, for you to discuss with your own divorce lawyer!  Today, let's talk a little bit about parent selection in a Georgia child custody case.

Did you know that, in Georgia, generally, a child who has reached 14 years old may sign a parent selection form and essentially choose with whom he or she wants to live?  Of course, the judge might still potentially ignore the kid's custody selection.  Moreover, the judge will still ultimately decide what is in the child's best interests.  But it is important that you know that, at least in the State of Georgia, parent selection is still possible. 

So, if you are going through a divorce from your worthless spouse, "Sluggo," and your son, "Sluggo, Jr." tells you he wants to stay with you, then you now know to make a beeline down to your divorce attorney and ask him or her about parent selection!  What are the rules about parent selection in your state? 

Joint Custody or Shared Custody: By Either Name Does It Really Work?

According to Divorce Lawyer Source and other sources, only about twenty percent of all divorces involving child custody result in a shared (or joint) custody arrangement.  Put another way, as you would suspect, in most divorce cases, one parent, (usually, the mother), gets sole physical custody and the other parent, (usually, the father), gets reasonable child visitation.

As Augusta, Georgia divorce attorneys, we, (at The Goolsby Law Firm, LLC), have seen both arrangements work.  In other words, while our experience with child custody has probably followed the norm, we have seen that shared (joint) child custody can work in some situations.  Each case is different.  But while shared (joint) custody may work for some families, it is simply not very practicable in others.  One practical issue involves challenges faced by school-aged children who are expected to go from one parent's house to another, from week to week.  Can't you see the problems such a child might face?  In other words, there are many practical issues which you must discuss with your divorce lawyer before agreeing to a shared (joint) child custody arrangement.

What other practicle problems are presented by a shared (joint) child custody arrangement?  Do you believe shared (joint) child custody can work? 

Nicole Richie Seeks Permanent RO Against Paparazzo

LOS ANGELES ( KTLA) -- Nicole Richie is set to appear in a Los Angeles courtroom Wednesday to request a restraining order extension against a paparazzo who allegedly got too close to her daughter.


Richie claims Fabricio Mariotto frightened her 2-year-old daughter Harlow while trying to take photos of the child at her preschool.


Richie is seeking a permanent restraining order.She is also reportedly expected to testify that other photographers have also crossed the line with Harlow and her 15-month-old son Sparrow.The restraining order is part of a larger campaign Richie is waging against the paparazzi who persistently pursue celebrities' children.Richie has been dating her children's father, Joel Madden, since 2006. The pair are reportedly set to marry later this month.


Richie is best known for co-starring with Paris Hilton in the 2003-2005 reality TV series "The Simple Life." She is the daughter of singer Lionel Richie and has recently become a fashion designer.



There are several types of restraining orders in California:

•Emergency Protective Order (EPO). This type of Restraining Order is issued by law enforcement and is valid for 5 days. It is used by domestic violence victims for their immediate protection and safety.


•Domestic Violence Temporary Restraining Order (TRO or DVRO). A California Temporary Restraining Order is in force for three weeks, but it can be made into a permanent restraining order for 1 to 3 years. This is also useful for domestic violence victims.


•Criminal Protective Order (“No Contact” Order). This type of restraining order is obtained through the District Attorney’s office, and is issued in active domestic violence cases. With this order, your abuser cannot call, write, e-mail or contact you at all except through lawyers.


•Civil Harassment Restraining Order (CHO). This restraining order doesn’t need to qualify as a domestic violence restraining order. It can be used to stop harassment, threats, stalking, etc. by neighbors, roommates and co-workers.

The best way to determine which restraining order you need to to work with an experienced California Restraining Order attorney who will focus on your best interests.

Japan's Child Custody Law

WASHINGTON, Nov. 24 (UPI) -- Sorting out child custody isn't east even in the most amicable of divorces but when an acrimonious separation involves two different nationalities, things can get even trickier, especially if a Japanese citizen is involved.

Still, it's unlikely that Japan will bend to international pressure to encourage equal guardianship of the children of failed relationships as it continues to adhere to the single-custody system that only allows one parent to have sole rights to a child.

The heat is on for Japan to sign the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction, with the European Union urging Japanese Justice Minister Minoru Yanagida at an October ministerial meeting in Tokyo to address the issue head-on. The 1981 treaty is designed to prevent one parent from a dissolved marriage between two people of different nationalities from taking their offspring against an existing child custody agreement and has been signed by 82 countries. Among the Group of Eight, Japan and Russia are the only nations that aren't signatories.

The United States too has ratcheted up its call for Japan to take the cross-border custody issue more comprehensively, and the Openness Promotes Effectiveness in our National Government Act of 2007 was passed by the late September calling on the Japanese government to "immediately address the growing problem of abduction to and retention of United States citizen minor children in Japan."

Patrick Braden, for one, can't wait for Japan to sign the international pact. The father of now 5-year-old Melissa, Braden hasn't seen his daughter since the mother of his child took the baby to Japan without Braden's consent four years ago. Even though a Los Angeles court had granted joint custody of Melissa to the couple, Japanese authorities haven't adhered to the court's ruling and have effectively given Melissa's mother full custody rights.

For his part, however, Braden hasn't once visited Japan either before or after his relation with the mother of his child, Ryoko Uchiyama, with whom he was never married.

"I don't see the point," Branden said. Instead, he has focused his energy on getting U.S. support for his cause, founding Global Future, an advocacy group focused solely on getting Japanese-American children currently with their Japanese parents back to their parents in the United States. About 300 children are believed to have been affected by the current legal limbo.

Still, it's unlikely that the Japanese government will sign the Hague treaty any time soon. Part of the reason why Japan hasn't given in to the demands of foreign parents is because the concept of joint custody doesn't exist. Rather, one parent -- usually the mother -- takes sole responsibility for children after a divorce and, while parents are free to argue on who should be the one responsible before a family court, any decision reached is final, and could spell the end of visiting rights for the losing parent.

Granted, such a drastic ruling on custody rights is coming under greater scrutiny in recent years, especially as Japan's divorce rate continues to rise. Nevertheless, there is no real public outrage over the current status of sole custody, and so long as that is the case, then the fact that a mother has taken over her child from the United States after ending her relationship with the father won't be viewed as bizarre.

In fact, there are greater concerns about how to actually implement joint custody when the parents live on two different continents, argued Sayuri Umeda, senior foreign law specialist at the Law Library of Congress who is also a lawyer both in Japan and the United States.

As for the pressure on the Japanese government to sign the Hague convention next year, it's likely to "be postponed again and again," Umeda said.

The real victims of the political impasse aren't the Japanese government or the disputing parents but the children who are forced into such extreme positions.

"It's a great tragedy for the children," Umeda said.

--

(Shihoko Goto is a former senior correspondent for UPI's Business Desk and is currently a freelance journalist who divides her time between Washington and Tokyo. She has written for Dow Jones, Bridge News, Congress Daily and a number of Japanese publications including AERA, a weekly magazine of Asahi Shimbun.)

--

(United Press International's "Outside View" commentaries are written by outside contributors who specialize in a variety of important issues. The views expressed do not necessarily reflect those of United Press International. In the interests of creating an open forum, original submissions are invited.)

Divorce, Custody, Visitation, and Not-So-Happy Holidays!

What are you thankful for this Thanksgiving? For most people, the holidays are a happy time. It is a time when families re-unite for fun, food, fellowship, and thanksgiving.

But for parents who have gone through a divorce, the holidays can be a sad time, because they are required to share their children with their ex-spouses. In fact, in many Georgia divorce cases, parents will generally alternate getting to see their kids, from holiday to holiday and from year to year. As a result, in such cases, if it isn't "your year," you may not even get to see your own children at all! How sad!

Hopefully, if you have gone through a divorce, this is "your year" and you will get to spend Thanksgiving with your children! But, if not, please be thankful that at least you won't have to spend another Thanksgiving with your worthless ex, "Sluggo!" Doesn't this fact alone make it a happy Thanksgiving?!

Conviction Movie

Conviction is an upcoming drama film directed by Tony Goldwyn. It stars Hilary Swank as Betty Anne Waters and Sam Rockwell as Kenneth. The film is scheduled to premiere September 11, 2010, at the Toronto Film Festival and to be released in U.S. theaters on October 15, 2010.

The film is based on the true story of Betty Anne Waters, an unemployed single mother who, with the help of attorney Barry Scheck from the Innocence Project, exonerated her wrongfully convicted brother. In order to do this she earned her GED, then her bachelor's, a master's in education, and eventually a law degree from Roger Williams University in Rhode Island. She accomplished this while raising two boys alone and working as a waitress part-time. While in law school she began investigating her brother's case.

Kenneth Waters, her brother, was convicted of murdering Katharina Brow in Ayer, Massachusetts, in 1983 (the murder occurred in 1980). His sister Betty Anne located biological evidence and then worked with the Innocence Project, a nonprofit organization devoted to overturning wrongful convictions, to obtain DNA testing on the evidence-- proving Waters' innocence and leading to his exoneration on June 19, 2001.[1] Betty Anne Waters now lives in New England and continues her work in freeing wrongfully convicted criminals, as well as fighting for the rights of prison inmates.

Sperm Donation and Law

WHAT IS THE LAW REGARDING SPERM DONORS AND PATERNITY RIGHTS/CHILD SUPPORT OBLIGATIONS?











So, I keep seeing ads for Jennifer Aniston's new film, The Switch. In the age of independent women, single moms, and vanishing importance of men, what is the law regarding sperm donation???

Short answer: sperm donors (known or unknown) have no paternity rights or obligations IF the sperm donation is done CORRECTLY, through licensed physician or licensed spem bank.

The relevant law is CA Family Code 7613:

(a) If, under the supervision of a licensed physician and
surgeon and with the consent of her husband, a wife is inseminated
artificially with semen donated by a man not her husband, the husband
is treated in law as if he were the natural father of a child
thereby conceived. The husband's consent must be in writing and
signed by him and his wife. The physician and surgeon shall certify
their signatures and the date of the insemination, and retain the
husband's consent as part of the medical record, where it shall be
kept confidential and in a sealed file. However, the physician and
surgeon's failure to do so does not affect the father and child
relationship. All papers and records pertaining to the insemination,
whether part of the permanent record of a court or of a file held by
the supervising physician and surgeon or elsewhere, are subject to
inspection only upon an order of the court for good cause shown.

(b) The donor of semen provided to a licensed physician and
surgeon or to a licensed sperm bank for use in artificial
insemination or in vitro fertilization of a woman other than the
donor's wife is treated in law as if he were not the natural father
of a child thereby conceived.

So...what if the parties had a previous intimate relationship which did not lead to conception - but the sperm donation did?

Case on point:
STEVEN S., Plaintiff and Respondent, v. DEBORAH D., Defendant and Appellant.

COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION FOUR

There, Steven and Deborah had agreement that Steven would be sperm donor. Deborah was artificially inseminated by Steven's semen, and got pregnant. However, the pregnancy was not to term. Later, Steven and Deborah had sexual relationship, but Deborah never got pregnant. They broke up. After they broke up, Deborah used Steven's sperm again, and this time, got pregnant and had baby.

Trial Court held that 7613 does not apply, and accorded paternity rights to Steven.

Appeal Court disagreed, and held for Deborah - NO paternity rights for Steven. Appeal Court reaffirmed the Legislative intent of FC 7613 - which is protection of the right of women to bear children through sperm donors without fear of paternity claims, and also to protect sperm donors from child support obligations.

Aggressive Lawyering Versus Obnoxious Lawyering: Which Is Best?

In this blog about divorce, I also try to give you some perspective about what it is like to be a divorce lawyer in Augusta, Georgia. Today, I want to give you my opinion about the effectiveness of what I call "obnoxious lawyering!"

I suspect that, in every community of divorce lawyers, there are at least two or three lawyers who equate being aggressive with being obnoxious. In other words, these "obnoxious attorneys" apparently believe that zealous advocacy means being disagreeable about every issue in the divorce, including everything from child custody to who gets the worthless plastic Star Wars cups in the kitchen.

Now, I have several theories about why some of these "obnoxious attorneys" act this way. Can I be honest!? First of all, I believe that a few of these lawyers want to simply drag out the divorce, so that they can bill their clients for a lot more money! In other words, by infecting the divorce case with their own disagreeable personalities, and their own unreasonable demands, they poison the well for everybody and make a quick, fair settlement less likely.

In addition, some of these divorce lawyers appear to lack sufficient life experiences to understand the difference between the important issues and the unimportant ones in a divorce. Also, perhaps some people over-compensate for a lack of self-confidence.

Finally, in my opinion, a few divorce attorneys simply have obnoxious personalities which spill over into their divorce law practices, along with every other aspect of their Scrooge-like existences! Believe me, when their nasty mop water buckets spill, they tend to get everybody around them dirty! And frankly, I believe that obnoxious divorce lawyers more often fail, rather than succeed, for their divorce clients.

So, in my opinion, when you select a divorce lawyer to represent you, it is imperative that you try to size up their personalities, too. In other words, you must decide whether you want an aggressive divorce attorney, who will cleanly fight for the important issues, or someone who will indiscriminately be disagreeable about everything and drag out your divorce with "Sluggo" into the next century!

Doesn't every profession have these obnoxious types? Is that the type you would want for your divorce attorney? What do you think?

Divorce, Child Visitation, and the Holidays

Look, just because it is the middle of Summer, and just because we are experiencing 100 degree temperatures here in Augusta, Georgia, please don't misjudge me, based on the holiday picture above, by thinking I have suffered a heat stroke! Actually, I just want to use the picture to illustrate a point.

The point is that, in a divorce with minor children, you should generally expect to have to share your children, (with your worthless ex-spouse, "Sluggo"), during the holidays. In other words, it is common in many Georgia divorce parenting plans for the spouses to alternate having the children at Thanksgiving and Christmas. For instance, you may have the little darlings on Christmas day during even numbered years and "Sluggo" will have them during odd numbered years.

But even though your divorce lawyer may be unable to guarantee you will get to see your children on Christmas Day every year, there are a number of ways to work around it, don't you agree? For example, you can celebrate the holiday with your kids on Christmas Eve. And even though it may not always be easy, hopefully, you and your children can still experience happy holidays!

Is Divorce Always Bad For Kids?

Here's some encouraging news about the effect of divorce on children. According to a new study out of Montclair State University, staying together just for the sake of the kids might, in some cases, actually do them more harm than good. Researchers interviewed children of divorce when they were young and then again more recently, after they became adults.

One interesting result of the study is that children who grew up in families with a lot of fighting and conflict fared better if their parents divorced.

Doesn't this result make sense? In other words, doesn't it seem more likely that kids who are exposed to fighting longer will suffer more in future relationships than kids whose parents ended the fighting more quickly with a divorce?

Look, I realize that every situation is different. Also, even though I am an Augusta, Georgia divorce lawyer, please don't mis-interpret this post as a promotion for more legal business! Trust me, there are plenty of divorce cases out there already!

But isn't it good that this study at least offers some encouraging news for parents who feel the need to seek help from a divorce attorney? What do you think?

Before Divorce

DIVORCE

Tips by Kelly Chang Rickert, CFLS

Are you headed that way?


Ok, before we even start thinking about divorce - GO TO COUNSELING. Couples AND individual. A lot of problems causing people to divorce may be personal problems. If you can save the marriage in any way, you owe it to the marriage - to the children (if you have them) - to your spouse - and to yourself - to do whatever it takes.

If, however, your differences are sincerely irreconcilable, here are some tips from a divorce lawyer.

1. DELETE your Facebook, MySpace, Twitter, or other social media profiles. You are about to embark in a very painful process. Although you should be able to share with few intimate friends, posting your feelings and experiences, PHOTOS, on Facebook could have negative consequences, including potentially legally adverse consequences. Just trust me on this.



2. Get a new email account. Better yet, if you can afford it, get a new computer. If you are sharing a computer, you need to make sure there is no spyware. If you plan to communicate with anyone (your mom, your therapist, your attorney), through emails - be discrete and careful. I've represented many a client who had full access to their spouse's emails.

3. If you have a prenup, take it out and review it. I always advise my clients who have prenups to keep it in a separate place. It is a bad idea to store your prenups in the same safe deposit box. They always end up missing when you need them the most.

4. Know your finances, especially if you are the "out-spouse". Just because you aren't currently earning income, doesn't mean you need to be dumb about finances. EDUCATE yourself as to the family finances. Even if you do not have statements, you need to keep track of institutions, account numbers, balances. This includes bank accounts, stock accounts, retirement accounts, credit card accounts, life insurance, and tax returns. There is absolutely NO excuse for being in the dark. Knowledge is power.

5. On that note, depending on whether you are the "in-spouse" or "out-spouse", you need to separate accounts immediately upon deciding a date of separation. If you are the supported spouse, it may pay for you to act clueless and draw out the date of separation. You can hire a private investigatore (while acting dumb) to figure out if community assets are being expended, trace accounts, etc. If you are the supporting spouse, and you suspect foul play, you need to immediately do what it takes to show objectively/subjectively a clear date of separation, and open separate accounts, depositing earnings post-separation into these separate accounts, immediately.

6. If you have children, you need to start figuring out a parenting plan. Children are NOT, and I repeat, NOT property to be divided. You need to consider that you are possibly wrecking their lives, and you need to take every step possible - including therapy, to make their little lives go as smoothly as possible during this split. Absolutely, without fail, please work out a parenting plan with your soon to be ex, WITHOUT court intervention. Barring any abuse or addiction, recognize that your marriage is falling apart, but RESPECT their role as the other parent. Suck it up. I know that custody battles seem glamorous, and seriously, "Everyone is doing it,", but the reality is: IT SUCKS AND YOU DO NOT WANT THIS. If there is any fight left in you, you need to FIGHT to get a good working parenting plan. You can do this. Engage the services of a custody mediator/facilitator. WORK IT OUT. I repeat, WORK IT OUT. DO NOT GO TO COURT. Even if you have 750 million dollars, do NOT pay attorneys to fight your custody battle for you.

7. Figure out where you want to live. Discuss it. Understand that if you move out, there may be legal consequences.

8. Budget accordingly. If you've never had to budget, this is painful. But a divorce is going from ONE household to TWO households. You will have 1/2 to live on. It doesn't have to "break the bank", or "take you to the cleaners", but you must recognize that money will be a bit more tight, so maybe skip French Laundry, and take the kids to McDonalds tonight.

9. Find good help. If I had cancer, I would be knocking down the doors of the best oncologist in town. Same with a lawyer. Don't hire an everyday lawyer who defends murder trials, and chases ambulances, and handles divorce. If you are going through a divorce, find a Certified Family Law Specialist to represent you. They will charge more. They've earned it, and you will get what you pay for.

10. Think good thoughts. Finally, whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things. Divorce is a nasty thing. You don't need to plague your thoughts. This, too, shall pass.

Divorce Lawyers LOVE Facebook

Forgot to de-friend your wife on Facebook while posting vacation shots of your mistress? Her divorce lawyer will be thrilled.

Oversharing on social networks has led to an overabundance of evidence in divorce cases. The American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers says 81 percent of its members have used or faced evidence plucked from Facebook, MySpace, Twitter and other social networking sites, including YouTube and LinkedIn, over the last five years.

"Oh, I've had some fun ones," said Linda Lea Viken, president-elect of the 1,600-member group. "It's very, very common in my new cases."

Facebook is the unrivaled leader for turning virtual reality into real-life divorce drama, Viken said. Sixty-six percent of the lawyers surveyed cited Facebook foibles as the source of online evidence, she said. MySpace followed with 15 percent, followed by Twitter at 5 percent.

About one in five adults uses Facebook for flirting, according to a 2008 report by the Pew Internet and American Life Project. But it's not just kissy pix with the manstress or mistress that show up as evidence. Think of Dad forcing son to de-friend mom, bolstering her alienation of affection claim against him.

"This sort of evidence has gone from nothing to a large percentage of my cases coming in, and it's pretty darn easy," Viken said. "It's like, `Are you kidding me?'"

Neither Viken, in Rapid City, S.D., nor other divorce attorneys would besmirch the attorney-client privilege by revealing the identities of clients, but they spoke in broad terms about some of the goofs they've encountered:

_ Husband goes on Match.com and declares his single, childless status while seeking primary custody of said nonexistent children.

_ Husband denies anger management issues but posts on Facebook in his "write something about yourself" section: "If you have the balls to get in my face, I'll kick your ass into submission."

_ Father seeks custody of the kids, claiming (among other things) that his ex-wife never attends the events of their young ones. Subpoenaed evidence from the gaming site World of Warcraft tracks her there with her boyfriend at the precise time she was supposed to be out with the children. Mom loves Facebook's Farmville, too, at all the wrong times.

_ Mom denies in court that she smokes marijuana but posts partying, pot-smoking photos of herself on Facebook.

The disconnect between real life and online is hardly unique to partners de-coupling in the United States. A DIY divorce site in the United Kingdom, Divorce-Online, reported the word "Facebook" appeared late last year in about one in five of the petitions it was handling. (The company's caseload now amounts to about 7,000.)

Divorce attorneys Ken and Leslie Matthews, a husband and wife team in Denver, Colo., don't see quite as many online gems. They estimated 1 in 10 of their cases involves such evidence, compared to a rare case or no cases at all in each of the last three years. Regardless, it's powerful evidence to plunk down before a judge, they said.

"You're finding information that you just never get in the normal discovery process — ever," Leslie Matthews said. "People are just blabbing things all over Facebook. People don't yet quite connect what they're saying in their divorce cases is completely different from what they're saying on Facebook. It doesn't even occur to them that they'd be found out."

Social networks are also ripe for divorce-related hate and smear campaigns among battling spousal camps, sometimes spawning legal cases of their own.

"It's all pretty good evidence," Viken said. "You can't really fake a page off of Facebook. The judges don't really have any problems letting it in."

The attorneys offer these tips for making sure your out-loud personal life online doesn't wind up in divorce court:

WHAT YOU SAY CAN AND WILL BE HELD AGAINST YOU

If you plan on lying under oath, don't load up social networks with evidence to the contrary.

"We tell our clients when they come in, `I want to see your Facebook page. I want you to remember that the judge can read that stuff so never write anything you don't want the judge to hear,'" Viken said.

BEWARE YOUR FRENEMIES

Going through a divorce is about as emotional as it gets for many couples. The desire to talk trash is great, but so is the pull for friends to take sides.

"They think these people can help get them through it," said Marlene Eskind Moses, a family law expert in Nashville, Tenn., and current president of the elite academy of divorce attorneys. "It's the worst possible time to share your feelings online."

A PICTURE MAY BE WORTH ... BIG BUCKS

Grown-ups on a good day should know better than to post boozy, carousing or sexually explicit photos of themselves online, but in the middle of a contentious divorce? Ken Matthews recalls photos of a client's partially naked estranged wife alongside pictures of their kids on Facebook.

"He was hearing bizarre stories from his kids. Guys around the house all the time. Men running in and out. And there were these pictures," Matthews said.

PRIVACY, PRIVACY, PRIVACY

They're called privacy settings for a reason. Find them. Get to know them. Use them. Keep up when Facebook decides to change them.

Viken tells a familiar story: A client accused her spouse of adultery and he denied it in court. "The guy testified he didn't have a relationship with this woman. They were just friends. The girlfriend hadn't put security on her page and there they were. `Gee judge, who lied to you?'"

Copyright © 2010 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.

The Importance of a Divorce Judgment!

GETTING TO JUDGMENT

"But I thought I was already divorced!?"

I have practiced divorce and family law for over a decade. HOW MANY TIMES HAVE I HEARD THIS SILLY STATEMENT?

FIRST, obviously, Judgment is important because it concludes your case.

I think many clients confuse Judgment with temporary Orders, which we often see in a divorce case.

In California, there is a waiting period prior to entry of Judgment. (6 months after proper service of the initial papers). Prior to entry of Judgment, temporary Orders are often secured and enforced. (aka "pendente lite", which means pending litigation).

This leads me to the SECOND reason obtaining a JUDGMENT is important in your case.

In a divorce case, though the pre-Judgment orders are "temporary", temporary does not mean they expire automatically. "Temporary" only means until Judgment, or a subsequent Order, is entered.

In one of my cases, the parties were married for 3 short years. Divorce was filed in 1996, and a temporary order was obtained - H to pay W $1000/mo for child support and $2000/mo for spousal support.

After the temporary order was entered, both parties went their merry ways, and assumed their divorce was final.

WRONG.

It is now 2010. W has now filed a case with Department of Child Support Services, and alleges that NOTHING was paid for these past 14 years. There is now 1.5 million owing in back child support, and about 2.75 million owing in back spousal support.

What's wrong with this picture?

EVERYTHING!

Had this case gone to Judgment, there is NO WAY the Judge would have awarded 2.75 million in spousal support; rather, spousal support would likely not exceed the length of the marriage (3 years), so maximum H would have paid would be $72,000. NOT 2.75 million.

In addition, the parties are STILL legally married.

Moral of the story: Temporary orders are insufficient. GET YOUR CASE TO JUDGMENT.

This Is Terrible News, Sandra!

Two family lawyers tell HollywoodLife.com that if Jesse James is really vindictive, he DOES have the right to keep Sandra Bullock away from his children!

We have some horrible news for Sandra Bullock. In addition to dealing with an imminent divorce from cheating husband Jesse James, experts tell us that Jesse CAN ban Sandra from seeing his children!

“She doesn’t have a right to see those kids. They are not her kids, and there is no such thing as custodial right for a stepparent,” LA-based family lawyer Kelly Chang-Rickert tells HollywoodLife.com. “The law is California prefers biological parents. Jesse has the whole say.”
So unfair! Jesse, 41, is the loser here, after cheating on his Oscar-winning wife with a reported 15 mistresses. But it will be Sandra, 45, who will lose out on seeing his kids, Sunny, 6, Chandler, 15, and Jesse Jr., 12.

A second family lawyer, Michael G. Dave of Marcus, Watanabe, Snyder & Dave, LLP, agrees with Chang. “Sandra doesn’t have much access to rights. She didn’t adopt the children. She’s Jesse’s wife who wants to divorce him. She’s got a long uphill battle to assert any rights to see the children.”

Dave adds, “I don’t think Sandra has much rights to assert if Jesse doesn’t want her with the children. He is the custodial parent. He has full rights. I think she has a zero percent chance of [getting custody] in a family law setting. Once Jesse slams the hammer down in turns of allowing the children from seeing Sandra, she doesn’t have much of a case.”
But Sandra, who was married to Jesse for five years, was practically like a second mother to his kids. Shouldn’t she have SOME rights?

“Legally she might not be allowed, but Sandy SHOULD be allowed to see the kids,” Dave tells us, adding, “If he really wants to be a good parent and if he truly has the best interest of his children, then he’d want to encourage it.”

But then, we all know what a dirtbag Jesse James is (one who was caught not wearing his wedding ring April 26, by the way). Who can predict what he’ll find the best interest of his children to be?
– Laura Schreffler

Facebook a "Treasure Trove" for Divorce Lawyers

By Larry Hartstein


The Atlanta Journal-Constitution

As if divorce lawyers needed more ammunition.

In a new survey, 81 percent say they've seen an increase in the use of Facebook and other social networking sites for evidence in divorce cases. Notes to lovers, compromising photos -- Facebook provides a wealth of incriminating information.

"Every client I've seen in the last six months had a Facebook page," said Ken Altshuler, a longtime divorce lawyer from Portland, Maine, who is first vice president of the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers. "And the first piece of advice I give them is to terminate their page immediately."

Sixty-six percent of the attorneys surveyed by the AAML called Facebook the unrivaled leader for online divorce evidence, followed by MySpace (15 percent) and Twitter (5 percent).

"Going through a divorce always results in heightened levels of personal scrutiny," said Marlene Eskind Moses of Nashville, the group's president. "If you publicly post any contradictions to previously made statements and promises, an estranged spouse will certainly be one of the first people to notice and make use of that evidence."

Altshuler cited a couple cases in which Facebook proved key:

A woman was getting divorced from her alcoholic husband and seeking custody of their kids. The husband told the judge he had found God and hadn't had a drink in months, but Altshuler found a recent Facebook photo showing him "holding a beer in each hand with a joint in his mouth," the lawyer said.

Then there was the custody case in which his client's ex-wife claimed to be engaged. She was trying to show she'd provide a stable household for the kids.

But the same woman had posted on Facebook that she'd broken up with her abusive boyfriend and "if anybody had a rich friend to let her know," Altshuler said.

The ex-husband's friend gave him the posting; he was still Facebook friends with the ex-wife.

"People don't think about who has access to their Facebook page," Altshuler said. "A good attorney can have a field day with this information."

"Facebook is a wealth of information," said Kenneth Altshuler, the first vice president of the AAML who has been a divorce lawyer for 25 years. "My first advice to clients is: ‘Shut down your Facebook page."