A self-censored chronicle of family court dramas, lived by parents who lost all or some visitation with or custody of a child or children based on perjury and/or other false courtroom evidence
The late Judge E. Spencer Walton of St. Joseph County, Indiana often remarked that one of the most important duties of an attorney opening a new file was also one of the least appreciated.
Guess which he was referring to?
A. Keeping the client informed.
B. Treating the client as an equal
partner in the matter.
C. Reviewing the file regularly.
D. Closing the file.
E. Copying the file for the client
d. Closing the file. (The actual answer - and 21% of responses)
Judge Walton’s admonition may actually stand in some considerable contrast to what the general ethic of the legal profession is: dedicated, zealous, and perhaps even endless advocacy.
But we think that at least in family cases he may be absolutely right. Are families actually assisted by teams of lawyers and a judiciary remaining more or less permanently involved in their affairs?
It seems to us that the legal profession, not to mention members of the public wanting to make aggressive and far-reaching use of the legal profession, could take a lesson from Judge Walton. And perhaps from the tendency of more progressive physicians to attempt to work with the human body rather than against the human body.
The “Extra Quote” this week speaks to this point. Chief Justice Burger went to considerable lengths to try to put the brakes on the law’s tendency (sometimes even a well-intentioned one) to get involved in too much of people’s lives. And then to stay too long.
At the very least, it seems to us that in family matters parents should be encouraged to do all they can, and use all the useful counseling, mediation, and other resources at their disposal, to reassume responsibility for their lives and the lives of their children.
In 2002, I "successfully" represented
myself for almost 3 years in my divorce and for our son. I became knowledgeable in Family Court litigation and I believed then that in Family Courts all of the lawyers and
Judges were driven to serve Justice and protect
the best interests of my child, family, and
therefore, unconsciously participated in the court proceedings for my daughter Zoraya.
Later on
when my Paternity Suit started in
2008, I learned that these proceedings, the Lawyers and Judges that drive to serve
Justice were nothing short of a swindle.
I have observed countless
families needlessly damaged and financially exploited by this system.
Predictably, my efforts to reform the system were answered by government
retaliation of my civil rights and fundamental human rights causing career damage, intentional and negligent emotional distress, and child abuse upon my daughter. Reported and ignored!!
When families are compelled by law into court for dispute resolution, their members do not realize
how much child-rearing freedoms they surrender to outsiders. The arbitrary
mandate of naming a “custodial parent” begins the damaging
process.
I AM A DEDICATED FATHER WITHOUT COMMISSION OF ANY
CRIME OR UNFIT PARENTING.
Suggestions for Interacting With Family Court Judges
Rule #1: Be Prepared
Judges have little patience with attorneys, and self-represented litigants, who aren't prepared when they enter the courtroom. Many litigants don't seem to know what they are asking the court to do, why they are asking for it, and what the best legal or factual grounds are for the orders requested. Courts everywhere, but particularly here in California with the passage of Family Code section 217 (which requires live testimony hearings upon request), are overburdened. Judicial resources are not sufficient to meet demand in these budgetary times, and this places a premium on directness and efficiency. Economic limitations also makes judges a lot crankier than if they had more resources to manage their caseload and calendars.
Depending on County size, wealth and population, California Family Law Judges typically have between 20 and 35 or more matters on their morning calendars. In the afternoons they are often holding evidentiary hearings and trials. If they are to move through these calendars by the end of the morning, brevity and efficiency becomes exceedingly important.
Therefore, one of the biggest mistakes that agitates judges is parties or lawyers who aren't prepared and so can't present their cases with clarity. If a lawyer doesn't appear to care overmuch about their client's case, then why should a judge? Lack of preparation, especially for lawyers, is a cardinal sin.
In jurisdictions with direct calendar assignments, where a judge is assigned to a case for all purposes or for all purposes possibly until the case is reassigned for trial, learn about the particular bench officer(s) who presides over your case. Information allows you to make useful assumptions about a particular judge's attitudes and policies.
As Judges Curtis and Zisman note, the best judicial officers are predictable and consistent in their rulings. "A judge's value to the public as a judge is in direct proportion to the ability of the lawyers who frequent the court to predict how the judge will deal with a particular issue." I find this to be so true in my personal experience. Lawyers who know how judges tend to rule on a given issue can set their client's expectations realistically. Armed with such knowledge, both sides are in a better position to have productive settlement discussions that avoid a "crapshoot" and the associated risks and expense. They don't potentially infuriate bench officers with weak arguments that, it is known, such judges may rarely accept.
Lawyers who are practitioners in any given court usually have good insights into local judge's attitudes. They may also be aware of information about a judge that is not generally available to the public, like their expertise, practice focus, and reputation before they took the bench. Knowing that while a lawyer your judge participated in a case that generated a published appellate decision on a move-away case, for instance, could provide you a wealth of ideas on how to tailor your presentation. Likewise, knowing whether a judge has been reversed is useful for making sensitive presentations.
Pro per litigants should consider observing a judge going through her calendar over the course of one or more days. You will learn tons about their judicial attitude from watching them in open court, and you may witness other parties get scolded or reprimanded for missteps and so avoid the same mistakes. A simple but classic example is the family court litigant who brings a small retinue of family members who are there to provide familial support, some of whom cannot sit still without gasping, shaking their heads violently, or sobbing.
Rule #3: Notify the Court If the Case Will Be Continued the Day Before
Sometimes one or both attorneys or parties intend to seek a continuance of a hearing, possibly because they want to discuss settlement but often because one or both are not ready to proceed or have late papers to submit.
Judges have very different attitudes towards continuances, particularly where they have already read the materials and then are faced with a continuance request. Lawyers who know that a case will not proceed are well advised to contact the courtroom clerk at least a day in advance to give a head's up - otherwise, they may wind up with a judge who justifiably feels "put out". Some allow self-represented parties to give advance notice of agreed upon continuances, but the other side will need to confirm it. Often messages must be left on the clerk's answering machine, and you may not know that number or whether messages were received or acted upon.
Where both sides have attorneysand a particular judge is known to permit it, counsel should always let the court know one or even two days in advance that the hearing is not expected to proceed that day.
Rule #4: Look At the Local Court Rules, If Any, and the California Rules of Court
Some counties or individual courts have local rules; many do not. Most judges have their own rules and styles, often never to be found in written form. It never hurts to ask the Court clerk, when the judge is off the bench, whether that courtroom follows any specific preferences, customs, or rules of procedures.
Rule #5: Talk to the Judge, Not the Other Party or Lawyer
The time to discuss your case or argue with the other side is before you enter the courtroom. It drives judges nuts when two lawyers, two pro se parties, or any combination of them begin to argue at counsel table as though the judge was not present. Keep your focus on the judge, and generally avoid looking at the other party except for emphasis. Never address the other party directly.
If you bring witnesses or support people in the courtroom, tell them in advance to keep control of themselves. This means no interruptions, no head shaking or head nodding, no gasps, and no agitated movements. It is natural that such people have an emotional investment in the outcome. However, if they act in an uncontrolled fashion, that may affect the court's evaluation of you. I don't have many times I told family members this, only to watch them go utterly vacant and stupid because their emotions get out of hand!
By Linda FieldstoneSupervisor Family Court Services 11th Jud. Cir.~
Although prevalence estimates vary, there is consensus that high percentages of justice-involved women and men have experienced serious trauma throughout their lifetime. The reverberating effect of trauma experiences can challenge a person’s capacity for recovery and pose significant barriers to maintaining healthy relationships, adjusting to life transitions and accessing services, often resulting in an increased risk of coming into contact with the criminal justice system and affecting their family court cases. Cindy A. Schwartz, MS, MBA, Consultant to SAMSHA’s National Center for Trauma Informed Care, will offer insights into how to interact with people in ways that help to engage them in services, keep them out of the criminal justice system, ease processing through the system, and avoid re-traumatizing. Justin Volpe, Certified Peer Specialist Consultant, will demonstrate how the application of effective practices can divert a trauma victim from self-destructive behavior to actions that can promote more productive responses when involved in family court actions.
The first case to recognize a non-custodial parent’s cause
of action based on the tort of intentional infliction of emotional distress was
Sheltra V. Smith, 392 A. 2d 431 (Vt. 1978). In this case, the non-custodial
parent brought suit for damages alleging that:
“defendant willfully, maliciously, intentionally, and
outrageously inflicted extreme mental suffering and acute mental distress on
the plaintiff, by willfully, maliciously, and outrageously rendering it
impossible for any personal contact or other communication to take place
between the (plaintiff and child).”
Id.
at 433.
The Superior Court, CaledoniaCounty, dismissed the complaint for
failure to state of cause of action on which relief could be granted. The
Supreme Court of Vermont, however, found that the plaintiff stated a prima
facie case for outrageous conduct causing severe...
Post Traumatic Stress (PTSD) causes a victim to re-experience the trauma–usually after they are triggered by a specific reminder. Not only does the trauma play in their mind but their body chemically responds, also going back to that place of trauma. The reminders can happen in the day during vivid flashbacks or, at night with nightmares or panic attacks. PTSD has a variety of symptoms including (but not limited to): feeling numb, becoming extra sensitive to stimuli (hyper arousal), outbursts of anger, avoiding the places or reminders of trauma, losing interest in things you once enjoyed, exaggerated startle response, feeling disconnected and depression.
The truth about litigation and the conduct of family court judges is not pretty. In fact the truth is so downright ugly that it is literally unbelievable to most people who have not experienced it firsthand. Most of us were raised to believe that our justice system ensures that in the end justice is served. Of course we know that there is misconduct and even corruption in some situations but surely that would not be true in cases involving child abuse, so we assume. Everyone knows that child abusers are considered to be on the on the lowest rung of the ladder in any and all social groups and surely no judge would knowingly and intentionally put a child into the hands of an abuser, right? Wrong. In fact, grossly wrong.
The truth is that child abusers are awarded full custody of the children they abuse on a regular basis and in many situations the family court judges KNOW they are putting these children into the hands of their abusers.
Unbelievable? YES. True? YES. But HOW and WHY can this possibly be true you must be wondering if you are one of the lucky few who has not witnessed this very sick operation of our family court system.
The HOW and WHY can usually be boiled down to a few simple factors. FINANCIAL AND POLITICALMOTIVATIONS.
One very common scenario is as follows...
There is a couple who has been divorced for several years. They share exactly equal parenting time per court orders, an exact 50/50 split of time. One parent is extremely narcissistic, very emotionally abusive and unusually wealthy. The other parent is mild mannered, compliant and very financially poor. The extremes between the two parents' personality traits and financial situations make the conditions right for a contentious custody issue to surface at any time, especially if the differences become more and more extreme over time. Narcissist personalities have an unbridled sense of entitlement. If they want it, they feel entitled to it. Period. Narcissistic personalities also lack any fear of consequences, including consequences as serious as jail time. When these traits are combined with unlimited financial resources, the results can be horrifying. For example, if a narcissistic and wealthy parent decides they want to violate court orders and withhold a child from the other parent they will do so with bold entitlement and without fear of any consequences. In fact they will probably even act proud of their illegal and unethical actions. This happens all too frequently. It seems the remedy would be simple in that the victim parent would seek legal assistance and the parent in violation of court orders would be swiftly corrected and punished by a family court judge.
Shockingly and sadly, that is not the reality of what most often happens. After attempting to beg, plead and reason with the narcissistic parent to stop violating court orders, the victim parent usually does hire an attorney and naively assumes that a family court judge will act swiftly with integrity. After all, that's what the family court judges are there for. Little does the victim parent know that the outcome of the case might very well have nothing at all to do with laws or ethics or what is in "the best interest of the children." With the "right attorneys" and unlimited financial resources, the narcissistic parent can and very often does ultimately purchase custody of the children.
Even in situations where it is 100% documented and 100% indisputable that the children have been abused by this person AND that the victim parent is the only mentally healthy and safe parent...even confirmed by the unbiased and objective expert opinions of doctors who have evaluated the children and even confirmed by the abuser's own admission... it is not only possible but likely the narcissistic wealthy abusive parent will obtain full custody of the children. The narcissistic parent will use their most coveted skills and weapons; charming people and money. The abusive parent's narcissistic skills combined with the legal tactic of financially and emotionally destroying the victim parent during litigation is very effective. With their financial resources, the narcissistic parent can hire a literal army of attorneys and you can be certain that they will hire attorneys who have very close relationships with the judge and are most likely some of the judge's top campaign contributors (yes, they really can do that.) This alone will almost assure the narcissistic parent of purchasing custody of their children.
However, narcissists derive intense pleasure out of harming their victims. Therefore, they usually take full advantage of their attorneys' strategy of draining the victim parent of every single penny they have until the victim parent simply has no choice to but sign a "settlement" under extreme duress.
Remember, the victim parent had little or no money to begin with. With the help of their "judge friendly" attorneys and the judge it's only a matter of time before the narcissistic parent has the victim parent financially devastated to the point where they literally can't provide food, clothing or shelter for the children. Many of these victim parents lose everything, every cent they ever saved and even their homes. Their credit is destroyed. They literally can't buy food or clothing for the children and must resort to assistance from various organizations to survive.
Again, this destruction of the victim parent is an INTENTIONAL ACT by the narcissistic parent.
The narcissistic parent WANTS to make the victim parent unable to provide food and clothing and shelter for their own children.
The narcissistic parent has the power to stop this cruelty against their own children at any time.
When the situation reaches this point of crisis, the victim parent simply has no choice but to face the fact that if they continue with litigation that they WILL end up homeless and unable to provide ANYTHING for their children including food. It is at this well-timed point of the planned attack that the narcissistic parent will present a "settlement offer" to the victim parent, knowing that the victim parent literally has no choice but to sign what in truth is a cruel and abusive ultimatum.
The narcissistic parent will take full advantage of the situation to ensure that the new modified orders will solidify their ability to abuse the children with provisions such as giving the abusive parent "exclusive psychological control of the children" and "exclusive educational decision making."
The abusive parent realizes that this is their opportunity to have it "ordered" that they can abuse their children, even going so far as to make it clear that they want it ordered that they can have 'full mind control' over their children.
“Honestly, based on the dealings I’ve had so far, I dislike
the other attorneys more than the opposing spouse! Why do attorneys have to
make everything so personal?”
The guy who said that practices family law in Florida, and I couldn’t
agree more.
You’ve had the same experience. The opposing counsel is
making you miserable. You are not alone.
My friend in Florida
asked, “How do you deal with attorneys like that?”
I’ll attempt to answer. However, I’ll warn you now that
there isn’t a secret formula for these situations. There isn’t a perfect
solution for dealing with these difficult humans.
When I’m dealing with one of these lawyers, I assume that
we’re in for the long haul. These folks typically drag out every element of the
case.
How to Never Let Your Clients (Or Opposing Counsel) See You
Sweat
Here’s my advice:
1. Accept it. Accept that they are who they are and that you
can’t change that reality.
Divorced Parents: Kids Should Decide Where They Live/Custody
Divorce can be ugly, but it doesn't have to be ugly for the kids.
Parents who are divorcing often get sucked into a nasty competition when it comes to the kids, with each parent vying for custody of the kids. Of course, both parents often want to keep the kids with them, which frequently results in joint custody. Once the arrangement is set, the kids shuffle between Mom's and Dad's respective houses, while the parents often avoid asking the kids what they want to do or with whom they want to live.
Well, the truth is that there are endless misconceptions about divorce and its effect on kids. Many people feel that divorce is psychologically harmful for kids, though the research - and I'm referring to Judith Wallerstein's research, in particular - actually shows that divorce does not harm children over the long-term unless other factors come into play. For example, divorced parents who maintain a bitter relationship post-divorce and talk badly about each other to the kids can cause kids major anxiety and distress. But aside from such instances, there are many things that divorced parents can do to limit the harm caused to the kids.
One thing divorced parents can do is make an ongoing effort to check in with the kids about how they feel about the assigned living arrangements. While children are young (10 years or younger), joint custody can provide an important reminder to the kids that their parents still love them and will both remain a fundamental part of the kids' lives. Yet the problem often starts when the kids get a little older.
Once kids reach the puberty years, they start to have a more active social life. During this time, kids start to develop the beginnings of an adult identity, and they start to make some of their own decisions. As they reach adolescence, kids of divorced parents understandably want more control over their environment, including where and with whom they live. Plus, as kids get older, the homework increases and their extracurricular activities become more involved. In other words, gathering all their stuff (books, notebooks, special articles of clothing, sports equipment, etc.) and dragging everything from one house to the other gets difficult. If a child in this situation doesn't particularly want to live with one of the parents, the child will become resentful and the resentment will manifest in a variety of acting-out behaviors.
If you are a parent who shares joint custody with your ex and your child is approaching the teenage years, set your own feelings and ego aside and ask your child how he or she feels about the living arrangements. Sure, it can be awfully hurtful to give up time with a child you adore, but sometimes letting someone go (a little) is the best way to show your love for them. Most importantly, divorced parents need to remember that the child did not choose for his or her parents to get married or divorced, so they should suffer as little as a possible as a result of the failed relationship.
Ultimately, talk-talk-talk to your child. Give your child a space to say how he or she really feels about the living arrangements, and try not react too emotionally to whatever they say. Though navigating these years can be difficult, the most successful parent-child relationships will always be those where the child feels that his or her feelings are respected.
If it turns out that your child would prefer to live with the other parent, work on developing a compromise that makes your child feel heard and simultaneously allows you to still spend meaningful time with your child. The teenage years are a great time to make an adjustment to the living arrangements, which could include the following: rotating houses in intervals of one or two weeks, as opposed to every few days; one parent having the child during the academic year, while the other has the child during the summer; maintaining the usual plan of 50/50 time during the academic year, but living with only one of the parents during the summer.
Ultimately, the point is to listen to your child, focus more on his or her feelings than your own, and model how to compromise. If you compromise with your child about custody now, you might find twenty years from now that your relationship with your child is stronger because of it.
The late Judge E. Spencer Walton of St. Joseph County, Indiana often remarked that one of the most important duties of an attorney opening a new file was also one of the least appreciated.
What Kind of Civil Litigator Are You?
