Every so often a client will ask me if it bothers me being married and doing what I do for a living. I usually come up with some clever retort, like, "it usually comes in handy right up until my wife gets tired of arguing and just beats the crap out of me!" The truth is I don't want to upset them with the real answer- it doesn't bother me a bit.
Maybe I could be more honest with them if I could articulate how I manage to work 50 to 60 hours per week amongst the wreckage of a failed or failing marriages without losing confidence in my own. Unfortunately, I can't articulate it - all I have to do is look at my beautiful wife Stephanie who married me seven years ago today and I know I can do it.
I suppose I could have Stephanie drive from her office to mine every time I meet with the new client so they can see what I'm talking about, but I think after a while my joke about her beating me might become a self-fulfilling prophecy. Maybe someday I'll find the right words to explain how having your perfect mate wake up with you every morning and be there for you every night gives you the power and the freedom to face anything that comes your way. Until then, I guess I'll just have to keep being clever. Happy anniversary, honey, I love you so much!
Monday, November 18, 2013
Saturday, November 2, 2013
Hit the Ground Stumbling
Not every client walks into my office in the immediate throws of a separation. A significant number of my new clients come armed with pre-existing consent orders, separation agreements, and sometimes active litigation.
That last category is worthy of it's own blog post on some future occasion because there are special considerations when a client is looking to replace his or her current attorney, or when they have been litigating has their own attorney for a while. The other two scenarios involve parties who have previously settled their differences or had them settled by a judge, that ehay present their own special challenges.
Domestic cases can be like zombies - they're never really dead, especially when you have kids. Custody is always subject to modification, as is child support and traditional court-based alimony. Property distributions, both private settlements and court orders routinely require future action, often the payment of money, and can take years to perform, even after the basic terms are decided.
Here, in no particular order is a smattering of the questions that run through my mind the first time I meet a client who has an existing custody order, alimony order, separation agreement, etc:
- If they had an attorney before, why aren't they sitting in his or her office asking these questions right now?
- How much information did they retain about the law as it applies to their case from their earlier experience?
- Did their prior attorney even care enough to pass along some useful knowledge?
- If they did, did they screw it up, thus making my job twice as hard?
- Are we going to talk about modifying something that is designed to be modified periodically like custody?
- Or, is the client just unhappy about his prior outcome and hoping for a do over?
I handle cases that fall within all those categories. I typically err on the side of explaining all the basic concepts relevant to the client's problem, regardless of whether it seems they have heard it all before.
With custody for example, I explain that modifying an old order requires showing a substantial change of circumstances is only part of what the client needs to understand. We need to look forward in time at the new custody order, assuming we prevail. What are the practical terms that will serve the children's best interest? Did the client think about legal custody versus physical custody and the ramifications of the new proposed arrangement for his or her ability to co-parent with the other party?
In cases involving modification of child support or alimony, is the client recently unemployed? Should we be waiting to see if a new job opportunity presents itself quickly? After all, these modifications can take months to be resolved? I don't like charging people thousands of dollars only to find that their circumstances are no longer "substantially changed" by the time we see the judge!
Anyway, I've had a number of these situations lately and walked away feeling like I need to practice how I conduct these consultations. This is one of those posts that is more helpful for me to write than possibly for you to read. Still, I hope it gives you a sense of how unique everyone's situation is comes through my door.
That last category is worthy of it's own blog post on some future occasion because there are special considerations when a client is looking to replace his or her current attorney, or when they have been litigating has their own attorney for a while. The other two scenarios involve parties who have previously settled their differences or had them settled by a judge, that ehay present their own special challenges.
Domestic cases can be like zombies - they're never really dead, especially when you have kids. Custody is always subject to modification, as is child support and traditional court-based alimony. Property distributions, both private settlements and court orders routinely require future action, often the payment of money, and can take years to perform, even after the basic terms are decided.
Here, in no particular order is a smattering of the questions that run through my mind the first time I meet a client who has an existing custody order, alimony order, separation agreement, etc:
- If they had an attorney before, why aren't they sitting in his or her office asking these questions right now?
- How much information did they retain about the law as it applies to their case from their earlier experience?
- Did their prior attorney even care enough to pass along some useful knowledge?
- If they did, did they screw it up, thus making my job twice as hard?
- Are we going to talk about modifying something that is designed to be modified periodically like custody?
- Or, is the client just unhappy about his prior outcome and hoping for a do over?
I handle cases that fall within all those categories. I typically err on the side of explaining all the basic concepts relevant to the client's problem, regardless of whether it seems they have heard it all before.
With custody for example, I explain that modifying an old order requires showing a substantial change of circumstances is only part of what the client needs to understand. We need to look forward in time at the new custody order, assuming we prevail. What are the practical terms that will serve the children's best interest? Did the client think about legal custody versus physical custody and the ramifications of the new proposed arrangement for his or her ability to co-parent with the other party?
In cases involving modification of child support or alimony, is the client recently unemployed? Should we be waiting to see if a new job opportunity presents itself quickly? After all, these modifications can take months to be resolved? I don't like charging people thousands of dollars only to find that their circumstances are no longer "substantially changed" by the time we see the judge!
Anyway, I've had a number of these situations lately and walked away feeling like I need to practice how I conduct these consultations. This is one of those posts that is more helpful for me to write than possibly for you to read. Still, I hope it gives you a sense of how unique everyone's situation is comes through my door.
Tuesday, April 30, 2013
Divorce? In THIS market?!?
First, an apology to my loyal readers for not posting in over two months! My wife and I are expecting our second child in just a few weeks. For reasons that make better bar stool conversation than blogging, we decided to mark the occasion of her pregnancy by buying a brand new house. If you've never built a new house before, I highly recommend that you pour yourself a cocktail to congratulate yourself on your preternatural wisdom!
Now that I've had a few days to reflect on the experience, I feel a new appreciation for the "marital residence" and the role it plays in my domestic cases. Today seems like an opportune moment to share some thoughts on the subject with you.
After the house bubble crashed, I noticed that I was having the same conversation over and over again in my new client consultations. The basic narrative went like this: "I really want to get out of this situation, but our house has lost sooo much value. I just can't think of how we'll get out from under it. Oh well, thanks for your advise, Ronnie. I'm going to ride it out a while longer until the market comes back, so that we can sell the house and make our property split easier."
They lasted about six month on average, then like seasonal locusts they all came swarming back at about that same time with a new narrative: "No. No. No... I was wrong. I admit it. No human being can tolerate this! Get me the hell out of here!!!"
In the good old days, your average, middle class divorcing couple had a house with some equity and some accumulated retirement, usually in a 401k - two ready sources of equity that could be liquidated to generate a fair property split and smooth the rough edges of a well-negotiated deal. Even today as the market recovers, a significantly higher percentage of my clients have little or no equity in the marital home. What's worse, some of them come to me having tapped their retirement to save the house, only to split and often be forced to sell the house without recouping those funds.
The net result of this is that domestic litigants are being forced to cooperate for longer periods and in greater depth than ever before, usually to maintain and sell their house as a part of an overall settlement. Why is this problematic? Well, because either (1) both parties keep living in the house (read: "911, what is your emergency?"); or (2) one party ends up living elsewhere and is totally reliant on the spouse with possession to maintain the house and everything in it. Even for people who like and trust each other this is tough. Feuding spouses typically share neither great affection or trust.
So, constant readers, today's take-away lesson is simple - if you are considering divorce PLEASE come see me before you move out. There are responsible ways to get free of a demoralizing situation, and if you are armed with complete information you are infinitely more likely to make the right call. Now, if you'll excuse me I'm off to Lowe's. My darling wife has closet needs...
Now that I've had a few days to reflect on the experience, I feel a new appreciation for the "marital residence" and the role it plays in my domestic cases. Today seems like an opportune moment to share some thoughts on the subject with you.
After the house bubble crashed, I noticed that I was having the same conversation over and over again in my new client consultations. The basic narrative went like this: "I really want to get out of this situation, but our house has lost sooo much value. I just can't think of how we'll get out from under it. Oh well, thanks for your advise, Ronnie. I'm going to ride it out a while longer until the market comes back, so that we can sell the house and make our property split easier."
They lasted about six month on average, then like seasonal locusts they all came swarming back at about that same time with a new narrative: "No. No. No... I was wrong. I admit it. No human being can tolerate this! Get me the hell out of here!!!"
In the good old days, your average, middle class divorcing couple had a house with some equity and some accumulated retirement, usually in a 401k - two ready sources of equity that could be liquidated to generate a fair property split and smooth the rough edges of a well-negotiated deal. Even today as the market recovers, a significantly higher percentage of my clients have little or no equity in the marital home. What's worse, some of them come to me having tapped their retirement to save the house, only to split and often be forced to sell the house without recouping those funds.
The net result of this is that domestic litigants are being forced to cooperate for longer periods and in greater depth than ever before, usually to maintain and sell their house as a part of an overall settlement. Why is this problematic? Well, because either (1) both parties keep living in the house (read: "911, what is your emergency?"); or (2) one party ends up living elsewhere and is totally reliant on the spouse with possession to maintain the house and everything in it. Even for people who like and trust each other this is tough. Feuding spouses typically share neither great affection or trust.
So, constant readers, today's take-away lesson is simple - if you are considering divorce PLEASE come see me before you move out. There are responsible ways to get free of a demoralizing situation, and if you are armed with complete information you are infinitely more likely to make the right call. Now, if you'll excuse me I'm off to Lowe's. My darling wife has closet needs...
Monday, February 11, 2013
Mobile Society
My father-in-law and his sister were for all intents and purposes kidnapped by their father when they were in grade school. In those days, there was an express maternal preference in the law of custody. From what I'm told, the judge simply asked his mother, who had severe emotional problems, what schedule she wanted for the children and was granted full custody.
Instead, my wife's late grandfather took advantage of the fact that the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction & Enforcement Act was at least a decade away and fled with this children across state lines.
These days, the maternal preference has been dropped from the law, but relocating children remains a hot button issue.
If you are the primary physical caretaker for your children and you are considering a move to another state or region, there are a several factors you should keep in mind:
- You will need to go to court first. If you want to move far enough away that it will affect the other parent's time with the children, the proper procedure is to file a motion with the court and request a hearing. Leaving without an explicit ruling from the court will subject you to contempt and liability for attorney fees, to say nothing of 86'ing your chance of being granted permission to relocate permanently.
- Have a flexible timetable. From the time you file your motion until the judge makes a ruling could take anywhere from four (4) to nine (9) months in most cases. Variables affecting this timeline include discovery procedures, mediation requirements, and congestion on the court docket. I've had cases on both ends of the spectrum. Often there are job opportunities at stake, and if your potential employer can't wait for your case to be resolved you may have choose between conceding primary custody and walking away from the job altogether.
- Have a kid-centered plan, or forget it. It is almost impossible to relocate children from stable, shared custody arrangement without showing manifest need. Often, though, the relocating parent's definition of need is tinged with self-interest. There are new spouses or significant others. There are extended families. There are more lucrative jobs. All these things can be great... for you. But how do you define the argument in such a way to convince the judge the kids's come first? If the children aren't the direct reason for the move, the odds are stacked against you.
Judges by and large disfavor relocation in all but the clearest cases, and I spend a significant amount of time in consults discouraging clients from moving unless they have no other choice. That being said, if you can convince me your proposed move it worth pursuing, you probably have a decent case.
Instead, my wife's late grandfather took advantage of the fact that the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction & Enforcement Act was at least a decade away and fled with this children across state lines.
These days, the maternal preference has been dropped from the law, but relocating children remains a hot button issue.
If you are the primary physical caretaker for your children and you are considering a move to another state or region, there are a several factors you should keep in mind:
- You will need to go to court first. If you want to move far enough away that it will affect the other parent's time with the children, the proper procedure is to file a motion with the court and request a hearing. Leaving without an explicit ruling from the court will subject you to contempt and liability for attorney fees, to say nothing of 86'ing your chance of being granted permission to relocate permanently.
- Have a flexible timetable. From the time you file your motion until the judge makes a ruling could take anywhere from four (4) to nine (9) months in most cases. Variables affecting this timeline include discovery procedures, mediation requirements, and congestion on the court docket. I've had cases on both ends of the spectrum. Often there are job opportunities at stake, and if your potential employer can't wait for your case to be resolved you may have choose between conceding primary custody and walking away from the job altogether.
- Have a kid-centered plan, or forget it. It is almost impossible to relocate children from stable, shared custody arrangement without showing manifest need. Often, though, the relocating parent's definition of need is tinged with self-interest. There are new spouses or significant others. There are extended families. There are more lucrative jobs. All these things can be great... for you. But how do you define the argument in such a way to convince the judge the kids's come first? If the children aren't the direct reason for the move, the odds are stacked against you.
Judges by and large disfavor relocation in all but the clearest cases, and I spend a significant amount of time in consults discouraging clients from moving unless they have no other choice. That being said, if you can convince me your proposed move it worth pursuing, you probably have a decent case.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
