Florida Divorce * Child Custody * Domestic Violence Law Lawyer | Boynton Beach

Regardless of How Retirement Accounts and Pensions Were Equitably Distributed in Your Divorce, You May Be Entitled to Greater Social Security Benefits – Based on Your Ex’s Earnings if They Were Higher

Janet Langjahr — Mon, 23 Jan 2012 20:51:21 +0000

Here’s a tip worth repeating for people who divorce relatively early in life, when retirement seems far off and is often out of mind.

If you are the spouse who earned less income, you may be able to collect some more social security based on your ex’s greater earnings and social security benefits.

Specifically, you may be entitled to half of your ex’s benefits.

You may even be able to collect six months’ worth of your share of their benefits for six months retroactively.

And, if you outlive your ex, you may be entitled to collect their full benefit.

All provided you were married to your ex for at least ten years.

There are some additional options and twists to collecting social security based on your ex’s social security entitlement.

It is well worth checking to make sure that you request and receive from social security all that the law entitles you to.

Divorce and Stress

Janet Langjahr — Sat, 21 Jan 2012 04:02:05 +0000

Divorce causes stress.

But divorce often is the result of stress as well. Including external stresses.

A report has recently come out ranking the largest fifty US metropolitan areas according to how stressful each is to live in.

The criteria that factor into the ranking include extent of:

divorce
unemployment
violent crime
property crime
suicides
alcohol consumption
mental health
sleep troubles
commute times and
cloudy days

Each of the stress-ranking criteria (including divorce rate but excluding number of cloudy days) would seem to be directly impacted by the recession and weakened state economy.

Despite Florida’s generally pleasant, sunny climate, our state’s larger urban areas, including West Palm Beach, occupy five of the ten most stressful positions among metropolitan areas in the US.

Of particular interest is that West Palm Beach’s divorce rate of 10.67% lies in the ninety-third percentile. Orlando has a 10.7% divorce rate, Jacksonville 12.3%, Tampa 12.3% and Miami 11. 5%.

Honey, I Want a Divorce … and I Want to Have a Child With Our Frozen Embryo

Janet Langjahr — Tue, 17 Jan 2012 14:12:29 +0000

Husband and Wife want to have a baby.

They resort to in vitro fertilization and freeze some of the embryos created for possible future use.

Husband’s and Wife’s marriage breaks down.

They are divorcing.

What happens to their frozen embryos?

Or, more precisely, which spouse gets to decide what happens to their frozen embryos?

To some extent, that depends on which state the couple live in. The case law, to the extent that there is state case law, goes every which way.

Prudence may suggest coming to an agreement on this issue before going down that road.

That may be done as part of a broader prenuptial agreement or postnuptial agreement.

Or it may be incorporated into an agreement with the in vitro fertility center.

The perfect solution? In theory, yes, but, in practice, maybe not so much, at least, depending upon where the interested parties live.

Because at least two states, New Jersey and Massachusetts, have reportedly cast such agreements aside in the face of one parent’s subsequent change of heart to no longer wanting to become a parent to a new baby.

Florida, on the other hand, not only recognizes agreements regarding frozen embryos but actually mandates that such agreements be made in advance (although this is not divorce-specific law but more a requirement of reproductive rights law).

It is worth noting, however, that, in the absence of such an agreement, Florida law explicitly recognizes the legal rights of both spouses over the embryos. A very good reason to make an agreement in advance and greatly reduce, if not eliminate, the uncertainty in the event of a later divorce.

But if the couple neglects to enter an agreement (or, presumably, if the agreement is ambiguous), it remains anyone’s guess what a court will decide to do with a couple’s frozen embryos.

Divorce With a Special Needs Child

Janet Langjahr — Sun, 08 Jan 2012 01:14:32 +0000

Divorce and child custody can be particularly complex when the separating couple has a minor child with special needs.

For many divorcing and separating parents of special needs children, not only are they new to the law governing divorce and child custody, but also the complex patchwork quilt of state and federal laws that may impact their special needs child’s long-term financial and legal future, into their adulthood …

And the special measures, far beyond the Individual Education Plan (IEP) their child may have, that they, as parents of special needs children, may need to take to protect their special needs children’s long-term legal and financial interests, into their special needs adult life.

This means that these parents have a lot to learn, more than most divorcing and separating parents. And a lot to do.

As far as the divorce or separation itself, child support is, of course, part and parcel of it if there are minor children, and most divorcing and separating parents know that. But many divorcing and separating parents are fuzzy on the particulars of child support.

Many divorcing and separating parents in Florida know that the obligation to support a child generally ends at the age of eighteen, and that the amount of child support is based upon statutory guidelines. True enough.

But what they usually do not know is that, where divorcing and separating parents in Florida have a special needs child, there are a couple of special twists to child support law.

First, the obligation to support a child who is dependent, such as a special needs child, may extend beyond the child’s eighteenth or nineteenth birthday or completion of high school, indeed, indefinitely. The child’s dependency must be the result of physical or mental incapacities from childhood.

Second, the amount of the child support obligation for a special needs child may deviate from the amount provided for in the child support guidelines. A greater amount of support may be awarded based upon the intact family’s preexisting spending to meet the child’s special needs.

Where the divorcing or separating parents of a special needs child have not done any special needs planning for their special needs child, their divorce or separation doubles as an opportunity to learn about special needs planning for their special needs child and to undertake some measures for the protection of their special needs child’s long-term financial and legal interests, into their adult lives with special needs.

Care and treatment for a special needs child over their lifetime can be quite expensive. It is never too early in their special needs child’s life for their parents to :

agree on and jointly designate formally a guardian for their special needs child in the event that both parents should die or otherwise be unable to care for their special needs child
consider seeking out government benefits available to their special needs child
consider ensuring that no gifts or inheritances pass directly to their special needs child, which could jeopardize their special needs child’s access to government benefits, such as Medicaid
consider establishing a special needs trust for their special needs child, to provide for their special needs child’s supplemental needs into their adulthood, without jeopardizing any government benefits their special needs child may receive, such as Medicaid

Golden Years Marriage Planning

Janet Langjahr — Wed, 04 Jan 2012 04:30:58 +0000

Getting married later in life is generally more complicated. Each spouse is more likely to have kids, assets, debts and health issues.

Accordingly, couples should reach agreement on the following matters before tying the knot:

how will expenses be shared / paid
which spouse will provide medical insurance, and how will it be paid for
to whom will each spouse leave their assets upon their death
should each spouse’s life / estate planning documents (wills, living trusts, powers of attorney, health care surrogates, etc.) be changed
should designations of beneficiaries of each spouse’s nonprobate assets (life insurance, IRAs, bank and brokerage accounts, etc.) be changed
should the couple enter a prenuptial agreement or prenup
should each spouse change their designations of beneficiaries of any other retirement, social security or pension benefits, and should the other spouse sign any necessary waivers of interest in such assets
has each spouse assessed the impact on their cash flow of loss of alimony and survivor’s benefits from previous spouses

The above considerations are not exhaustive but should serve as a springboard for discussion.

How Long Does a Divorce Take? Sometimes, An “Indefinite” Amount of Time

Janet Langjahr — Mon, 02 Jan 2012 21:27:07 +0000

Spouses divorcing in South Florida often have preconceived notions about how long it may take for their divorce to go through. Or how long it will take for their “emergency” motion to be heard by the divorce court.

These notions usually bear no relation whatsoever to the reality prevailing in family court here in South Florida.

They are typically idealistic as to how courts operate routinely, let alone during periods of budget cuts and the like, which can exert a sudden, dramatic impact.

Divorcing couples in South Florida would probably be even more shocked by the current reality in divorce courts in Essex County, New Jersey, which is close to New York City.

Specifically, all divorce trials of contested divorce cases in the family courts have been suspended / stopped / canceled. Indefinitely.

With six judicial vacancies unfilled, there simply aren’t enough judges to hear all the divorce cases waiting to be heard.

Reportedly because the governor of New Jersey has held up appointments of judges.

Reportedly because the opposing political party has held up appointments of commissioners to local governmental bodies.

So, perhaps impatient divorcing couples in South Florida should take solace in the fact that they don’t live in Essex County, New Jersey. Where the situation could always be worse.

Therapeutic Theater for Divorce

Janet Langjahr — Mon, 02 Jan 2012 14:12:20 +0000

Everyone knows that arts and theater can be therapeutic.

And so, in keeping with the high spirits of the holiday season, the intellectually and emotionally adventurous may wish to take a fresh look at divorce (their own, or the institution) through Divorce Party: the Musical – The Hilarious Journey to Hell…and Back! Yes, you read that right.

The unlikely musical comedy will have its world premiere next week right here in Palm Beach county, Florida, at the Kravis Center in West Palm Beach.

The underlying theme of the show, which is nonetheless serious despite the humorous treatment, is divorce recovery and embracing starting over.

The play also broadcasts the message “Don’t get mad – get everything!” I’m just saying.

The website for Divorce Party: the Musical boasts bullet points of inspiration and advice in the readily digestible form of the Divorce Party Top Tens.

Permanent Alimony Award is Upheld In Long Term Marriage Where Relatively Young Spouse Works Only Part-Time Due to Fatigue Associated With Multiple Sclerosis

Janet Langjahr — Fri, 16 Dec 2011 04:16:33 +0000

Iowa Husband and Wife are divorcing after nearly twenty years of marriage. They have three Children together.

Wife works part-time as a nurse and seeks alimony from Husband, a supervising mechanic.

Husband contends that Wife should work full-time to earn more money and receive benefits. Husband asks the court to reduce spousal support following a ten year period.

Wife has had multiple sclerosis since before the parties’ marriage. One of the symptoms of multiple sclerosis, a sometimes disabling disease, is extreme fatigue.

Wife maintains that she cannot work full-time because she requires a day off for rest after two days of work.

Wife’s medications to treat her multiple sclerosis will cost a whopping $4,300 per month if her coverage through Husband’s health insurance plan ends.

Husband earns five times Wife’s salary from his primary employment and his part-time work on the side.

At trial, the family court awards Wife $600 per month in permanent alimony. The divorce court further orders Husband to maintain Wife on his insurance as long as is permitted. The family court also awards Wife primary custody of their Children and awards Wife child support.

Both Husband and Wife appeal the family court’s rulings at trial.

On appeal, the intermediate level appellate court increases Wife’s award of permanent alimony to $700 per month, but reduces the award of child support. Otherwise, the court upholds the trial court’s rulings.

On appeal to Iowa’s highest court, the intermediate appellate court’s rulings are upheld.

Read more in this Iowa family court case.

Florida Mother-in-Law Allegedly Shoots Son-in-Law When He Comes to Pick Son Up for Visitation

Janet Langjahr — Tue, 13 Dec 2011 03:00:18 +0000

Florida Husband and Wife are divorcing. Not amicably.

They have one Son, who is three years old. They are reportedly battling over custody and timesharing.

Husband arrives at Grandmother’s house to pick up Son for his visitation.

As Husband approaches Grandmother, Grandmother allegedly reveals a handgun and discharges three bullets into Husband.

Husband flees.

Grandmother calls the police … and reports that Husband drew a pistol and threatened her with it.

Grandmother files for a domestic violence restraining order of protection against Husband.

Husband later calls the police as well. But Husband’s account departs from Grandmother’s.

However there are two variations from the all too common “he said, she said” in divorce and domestic violence cases. First, the she is Husband’s mother-in-law, rather than his wife.

Second and more significantly, Husband captures the entire incident on an audio recorded by his cell phone’s video camera.

Grandmother is arrested for attempted murder and detained.

Read more in

Parents Plead Guilty to Interference with Custody for Allegedly Abducting Their Eight Children From Foster Care – Easily

Janet Langjahr — Fri, 09 Dec 2011 17:31:05 +0000

New York Husband and Wife have seven Children together.

One of their Children reportedly arrives at school with one eye bloodshot.

This apparently precipitates a report of alleged child abuse to New York’s child welfare agency.

Children are removed from Husband and Wife’s home and taken into child protective custody.

And placed in foster care, reportedly in three separate foster homes. Nearly three years ago.

Along the way, an eighth child of Husband and Wife is born. She joins her siblings in foster care.

Husband and Wife claim to have complied with the Family Court’s juvenile dependency case plan with the expectation of being reunited with Children.

They maintain that they are good parents who provided a loving home. They are critical of the care provided by New York’s child welfare agency, citing the agency’s unnecessary medication of one Child for hyperactivity, inadequate security, Children’s complaints of insufficient food and appearance of bruises and cuts on Children.

But Husband and Wife assert that they got wind that their parental rights were going to be terminated and Children were going to be adopted.

Wife has a supervised visitation with Children at a foster care and supervised visitation facility.

Children walk out of the facility with Wife.

And Husband and Wife allegedly go on the run with Children.

For seven days. Until they are caught by law enforcement.

And Husband collapses and is hospitalized for several days.

Children are in good condition. Husband and Wife are arrested on charges of kidnapping Children.

Husband and Wife later plead guilty to interference with custody.

They serve sixty days of confinement and are also sentenced to three years of probation.

Children remain in foster care. Husband and Wife are barred from any contact with Children.

A hearing on visitation for Husband and Wife is forthcoming.

Read more in

Open, Public Family Courts? Maybe Not So Much … in Some Areas

Janet Langjahr — Wed, 07 Dec 2011 03:19:57 +0000

As a matter of public policy, Florida is big on transparency. That’s why we have Sunshine Laws.

In general, our courtrooms are open. Even in family court.

Not so everywhere though.

New York law mandates that its family courts are open to public access. And in theory they are, going on fourteen years.

But, in practice, the reality is a bit different.

Common practices have been demonstrated to include:

locked courtroom doors
Do Not Enter and Stop signs on courtroom doors
signs proclaiming that only people on official business may enter
guards challenging those seeking entrance to courtrooms
guards flat-out denying access to courtrooms
a judge admonishing a reporter to report to a clerk to show his press pass, who in turn told the reporter … that he needed permission from the chief administrative judge to observe in the courtroom
another judge characterizing family court proceedings as “confidential”

How hit or miss is open access to family courts in New York?

A reporter on a mission to find out was actually denied access to thirty-five courtrooms – out of forty.

Even after identifying himself as a member of the press.

Top representatives of New York’s courts apologized and vowed to do better.

Time will tell …

Disabled Woman under Public Guardianship is Denied Any Contact with Her Biological Sister Because of Sister’s Physical Resistance against Taking Woman into Custody When Sister Was Roughly Four Years Old

Janet Langjahr — Sun, 04 Dec 2011 21:03:24 +0000

Twenty-nine year old Australian Woman disabled by both cerebral palsy and multiple sclerosis is committed to the legal guardianship of a child welfare Agency in her childhood.

At the time when Woman was taken into government care, her younger Sister was about 4 years old. Sister reportedly resisted the government action, and allegedly struck a child welfare worker.

Woman’s file today reflects that Sister, now twenty, has “anger management issues” … and, as a result, Sister is denied any meaningful contact with Woman, even though Sister keenly desires to have a relationship with Woman.

Sister has appealed to the welfare Agency that administers adult guardianship in Australia, but the Agency has refused to intervene in the situation.

And so Sister is limited to contacting Woman’s caregiver each week, in the hope of finding out how Woman is doing and securing eventual granting of her repeated requests for access to Woman.

Child Placed in Foster Care … Over Failure to Lose Weight at Home

Janet Langjahr — Sat, 03 Dec 2011 05:18:10 +0000

Mother has eight year old Son, who is an honor student actively engaged in his school community.

Son is overweight. Extremely.

Just under 220 pounds. Sixty of them gained in one year.

At least one doctor has characterized Son’s weight gain as “life threatening”.

Doctors have ruled out a medical reason for Son’s weight gain, concluding that it is “environmental”.

Ohio child welfare agency (Agency) intervenes due to Son’s sleep apnea.

Son is deemed to be at high risk of developing serious weight-related health conditions.

Son fails to lose weight after a year.

So … Agency removes Son from Mother’s care and places him in foster care.

Ohio juvenile dependency court rules that Mother has neglected Son’s medical care … because Son has not dropped any excess weight to speak of.

Mother and Son are granted one visit per week. For two hours.

An Ohio public defender reports that, by contrast, other Ohio parents have been allowed to keep custody of their children despite having serious drug abuse issues and having beaten their children.

Son has reportedly lost some weight in foster care. But his foster parents are reportedly struggling to keep up with Son’s medical care.

Mother is seeking to regain custody of Son.

Son is representative of the seventeen percent of American children who are obese.

The foster care system is already stretched thin serving children who are abandoned, abused and neglected as those terms are commonly understood.

While some in the medical community advocate placing children in foster care to combat extreme obesity, others reject such extreme measures based only on probability of children developing certain medical conditions, rather than actual diagnoses.

Proposals have been advanced to provide enhanced services to obese children and their families so that such obese children can remain in their homes. Arguably a more practical alternative from a societal perspective and a more palatable alternative from the families’ perspectives.

Family Court Treads Deeper into Parental and Spousal Use of Social Media Websites and Dating Websites

Janet Langjahr — Fri, 18 Nov 2011 04:35:35 +0000

Husband and Wife are divorcing. They have a Child.

They are using social media websites. And dating websites.

In the old days of social media, like last year, used to be your worst nightmare was your ex stumbling upon your indiscreet post that could hurt your divorce or child custody or child support or alimony case. That was then.

Now is now.

Husband happens to find some material online that he believes calls Wife’s parenting into question. Which spurs him to seek more of the same, from the presiding family court.

And the Connecticut family court obliges … and ups the “game”. Exponentially.

Specifically, the divorce court orders both divorcing spouses to submit to the family court – and to each other – all of their respective user ids and passwords on all social media websites they use and all of the dating websites that they use.

Meaning that, if it’s out there, it will surely be found.

Which may be why the Wife allegedly asks a friend to clean up after her and delete anything damaging left in her wake.

Only that backfires on the Wife … because the family court then enters an order enjoining or prohibiting either spouse from deleting any of their material from social media websites or dating websites.

Champions of individual privacy rights are sounding an alarm over this arguable invasion of both spouses’ privacy.

Interestingly though, the family court ruling reportedly violates the privacy policies and terms of use of several of the social media websites and dating websites involved.

This could potentially open up a can of worms. That could potentially result in consequences running the gamut from the websites in question closing both spouses’ respective accounts and banning them … to the websites in question formally intervening in the family court case to protect their users’ privacy rights and enforce their own privacy policies and terms of use.

One thing is for sure. We haven’t heard the last of these divorce court rulings.

Stay tuned …

Mother Allegedly Schemes to Deny Ex-Husband Half Share of Inheritance From Son’s Personal Injury Recovery in Special Needs Trust

Janet Langjahr — Thu, 20 Oct 2011 02:38:19 +0000

Husband and Wife have a Son. And then promptly divorce.

Husband moves far away and starts a new family.

Wife raises Son alone. Son has no contact with Husband.

When Son is just eighteen years old, Son has a heart attack while at high school.

Son suffers severe brain damage as a result of his heart attack and allegedly inadequate care while at the high school.

Wife sues the School District for negligence. Wife and School District settle, with School District agreeing to pay $34,000 per month into a Special Needs Trust for Son for twenty years.

Because Son’s recovery is sheltered in a Special Needs Trust, Son is able to receive substantial public health benefits to meet his special needs.

Son dies five years later. Leaving $8 million behind in his Special Needs Trust.

The Special Needs Trust passes to Son’s estate. Since Son does not have a will, under the applicable law, the Special Needs Trust passes fifty-fifty to Wife and Husband.

Wife allegedly plots to deny Husband his half interest in Son’s Special Needs Trust. She reportedly refuses to provide the law firm handling the Special Needs Trust with Husband’s contact information.

She drives from California to Husband’s workplace in Rhode Island and allegedly tricks Husband into signing a disclaimer or waiver of Husband’s interest in Son’s Special Needs Trust, telling Husband that the document is for Son’s burial.

When the first disclaimer document is determined to be possibly inadequate, Wife drives to Rhode Island again with another disclaimer or waiver for Husband to sign.

This time, Husband becomes suspicious and consults an attorney. And then seeks to set the original disclaimer aside. And Wife sues to enforce the original disclaimer.

At trial, the Court refuses to enforce the original disclaimer, due to Wife’s deception as to the nature of the document and insufficient identification in the document of precisely what it is that Husband is waiving.

On appeal, the appellate court affirms the award of half of the Special Needs Trust to Husband.

Even though Husband was never a part of Son’s life after his birth and was not involved in the litigation which resulted in Son’s recovery.

It is hardly surprising that an eighteen year old did not have a will.

Given the severity of Son’s injuries, however, it is surprising that greater attention was not paid to identification of Son’s actual caregivers and loved ones, and protection of their interests under Son’s Special Needs Trust.

Politicians Compete for … Lack of Jurisdiction Over Misdemeanor Domestic Violence

Janet Langjahr — Sun, 09 Oct 2011 03:20:34 +0000

County in Kansas suffers budget cuts, which in turn leads to budget cuts to County prosecutor’s office.

As a result, the County prosecutor’s office proclaims that it will no longer prosecute municipal misdemeanors, leaving those to the City to prosecute.

The City asserts that it cannot afford to prosecute those cases either and that the City’s attorneys have no experience in prosecuting such crimes.

So, misdemeanor domestic battery everywhere within the County goes unpunished and undeterred … for a month now.

In fact, the City may actually decriminalize domestic violence to deprive itself of jurisdiction over such crimes, in the hope that the County’s jurisdiction will fill the vacuum.

So far, all domestic violence suspects arrested by city police in the last month have been released.

Arbitration: Another Alternative Dispute Resolution Method to Consider in Family Law Cases

Janet Langjahr — Sat, 24 Sep 2011 18:27:42 +0000

These days, many couples are searching for what they hope is an easier, cheaper approach to divorce (and resolution of other disputes too). Different practitioners each tout their own preferred methodology.

One such available methodology that gets less attention than some others is arbitration. Arbitration is an alternative dispute resolution option, in that it aims to avoid lengthy family court litigation (paper motions and multiple legal and/or evidentiary hearings) that culminates in a divorce court trial before a family court judge in a family court courtroom.

Compared to mediation, another alternative dispute resolution methodology, arbitration is still fairly trial-like. So what is arbitration, and why would someone consider using arbitration?

In a nutshell, arbitration is generally faster, more private, less expensive and less formal than conventional litigation.

An arbitrator, a privately engaged professional, often a former judge, presides over proceedings as an ultimate decision-maker, much like a judge. But in arbitration, the parties get to choose their arbitrator for themselves.

An arbitrator hears testimony and also considers other, nontestimonial evidence in arriving at an award, much like a judge.

Typically, an arbitrator’s decision in a binding arbitration is final (although there are certain narrow exceptions).

The arbitration process is generally leaner and more streamlined than typical family court proceedings. Most hearings before the ultimate hearing are eliminated, and development of evidence from the opponent and third parties is normally reduced. This saves parties money as well as time.

And the “main event” is not held in a public courtroom.

Of course, like almost anything else, arbitration can be misused and abused so as to erode its good features and advantages.

Arbitration has not gained great traction in Florida family law yet, but it is finding favor in Canada and other countries already.

Warning: Chinese Adoptees May Be Victims of Government Seizure … Because Their Birth Parents Violated Restrictions on Reproduction and Can’t Afford the Overpopulation Fine

Janet Langjahr — Mon, 19 Sep 2011 00:29:10 +0000

According to an article that appeared in the New York Times last month, certain Chinese provincial governments seize babies from their parents, who cannot afford their fines for violating restrictions on reproduction, and then they sell the seized babies on the black market, into adoption.

For American parents of adopted Chinese babies, such reports are a disturbing revelation. Fueling nagging questions about their children’s origins, and the circumstances leading to their adoption.

But the subject is largely taboo among adoptive parent communities, who have ample reason to fear that questions will only slam the door to adoption in the questioners’ faces.

Some sixty four thousand Chinese babies were adopted in the US from 1999 through 2010.

And, unlike several other countries, China has long been perceived as the most ethical adoption system, which is a source of adoptable babies, that can be found overseas.

Family Court Modification of Another State’s Family Court Order By Expanding Grandparents’ Visitation and Timesharing is Upheld on Appeal

Janet Langjahr — Sat, 17 Sep 2011 16:37:51 +0000

Louisiana Husband and Wife have a preschool-aged Daughter together.

Wife dies.

Wife’s parents, Grandparents, seek visitation and timesharing with Daughter.

Husband and Grandparents reach an agreement granting Grandparents substantial visitation with Daughter. The agreement recognizes that the timesharing schedule will have to be adjusted when Daughter begins school.

The agreement is adopted in a Louisiana family court order. The family court also approves of Husband and Daughter relocating to Mississippi.

After Husband and Daughter relocate, Husband registers the Louisiana family court order in Mississipi. This permits enforcement of the Louisiana family court order in the Mississippi family court.

Grandparents ask the Mississippi family court to hold Husband in contempt and enforce the Louisiana family court visitation and timesharing order.

Husband does not dispute his noncompliance with the Louisiana family court order.

He does, however, ask the Mississipi family court to modify the Louisiana family court order by dramatically reducing Grandparents’ visitation and timesharing with Daughter based upon her reaching school age and certain conduct by Grandparents that he objects to, such as allegedly not adhering strictly to Daughter’s special diet and calling Daughter by her first name instead of her middle name, which is the same as Wife’s.

The Mississippi family court changes Grandparents’ visitation and timesharing schedule, but does not reduce their visitation. In fact, the Mississippi family court increases their timesharing a bit.

Husband appeals as to the modification only, objecting that his due process rights were violated by a perceived rejection of his objections to Grandparents’ conduct and arguing that Grandparents did not ask for more visitation, so the family court does not have authority to award it.

On appeal, the Mississippi appellate court upholds the Mississippi family court’s modification and expansion of Grandparents’ visitation and timesharing schedule with Daughter, underscoring that the original Louisiana agreement and court order affording Grandparents visitation and timesharing were not challenged when made in Louisiana and are not subject to review on this appeal.

As for the changes made by the Mississippi family court, the appellate court finds that both parties asserted that Grandparents’ current timesharing schedule no longer works for them and Husband specifically sought modification of the schedule in his pleadings. Grandparents’ objections to the schedule was tantamount to a request by Grandparents for modification.

And the Mississippi family court found at trial that it was in Daughter’s best interests to increase timesharing with Grandparents, and that finding was within its discretion.

The appellate court also confirms that the Mississippi family court has jurisdiction to modify the Louisiana court order under Mississippi’s Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act.

Since neither Daughter, either of her parents or any one “acting as a parent” to Daughter still lives in Louisiana, and Daughter and Husband have been living in Mississippi for two years, Mississippi is now Daughter’s “home state”. Grandparents’ access rights do not bring them within the statutory definition of someone “acting as a parent”. Indeed, Husband has “sole legal custody” of Daughter.

As to Husband’s objections to certain specific conduct by Grandparents, the Mississippi family court instructed Grandparents in regard to those matters. Thereby accommodating Husband’s due process concerns and upholding his fundamental parental rights.

Mother Performs Do It Yourself Circumcision on Her Baby … With a Box-Cutter

Janet Langjahr — Fri, 16 Sep 2011 16:55:05 +0000

Oregon Mother has three month old Baby.

Mother reads the Old Testament and decides that she wants Baby to be circumcised.

But Mother fears Baby is too old for a doctor to agree to perform the circumcision.

So Mother watches YouTube videos on circumcision.

And decides to perform the circumcision on Baby herself.

Using a box-cutter.

Only Baby bleeds excessively and suffers great pain during the circumcision.

So Mother dials 911 for assistance.

Mother is arrested for harming Baby.

Mother pleads guilty to criminal mistreatment.

Mother is sentenced to five years’ probation…

And ordered to undergo a psychiatric evaluation.

The Court finds that she loves Baby and had no intent to hurt him.

Baby has since recovered and lives with his three siblings … in the child welfare system. Mother has supervised visits with Baby and his siblings.

Discourage – and Don’t Heed – Divorce Advice from Amateurs and Victims with Axes to Grind

Janet Langjahr — Thu, 15 Sep 2011 23:03:17 +0000

Just about everyone has either been divorced themselves or gone through it, vicariously, with a close friend or loved one.

That’s probably why just about everyone has an opinion on just about every aspect of divorce … and fancies themselves the expert to be giving you advice.

Regardless of whether the divorce they are familiar with occurred in the same state, subject to the same laws as yours, or of whether the circumstances of that case are even remotely similar to yours.

They all mean well, of course. But they generally just overwhelm you with input, breed confusion, anxiety and doubt, cost you extra legal fees for explanations of why your case or the applicable state law is different from their case and the law that applied to it and, worst of all, undermine your legal position and steer you into the proverbial doghouse with your judge.

(Take the example of one of my client’s buddy-advisors: “You don’t have to follow that court order. It’s unconstitutional. I saw that on the internet.” The it in question refers to child support. And the principled good buddy won’t be the one headed off to the pokey.)

In most cases, it’s really best not to discuss the details of your divorce with others. Not unless you want to see them in court … testifying under subpoena from your spouse – about the “private” information you leaked to them. Yeah. Oops.

And you don’t want to spill your guts on social media either. Those leaks don’t even require subpoenaing your buddy to testify.

If you can afford to hire divorce professionals, let them do their jobs for you. If you can’t, then do your best to learn and follow the rules and law yourself. Then rely on your own judgment. Don’t poll the universe about the specifics of your case.

And it’s not just women that get into trouble with this. In my experience, in general, men are just as prone as women to gossiping about their marriage and their divorce, and, in general, even more prone to leaking and polling.

Be the exception. In the end, you’ll be glad you were.

Family Court Ignores Wounded Active Duty Soldier’s Substantial Efforts to Invoke The Protections of The Service Member’s Civil Relief Act, and Tramples Over His Rights to Defend in A Child Support Modification Case in Family Court

Janet Langjahr — Thu, 15 Sep 2011 17:57:45 +0000

Kentucky Husband, who has been serving in the US army, and Wife have two Children together.

Husband and Wife divorce. Husband is ordered to pay child support.

Several years later, Wife seeks to modify child support.

Husband, representing himself, writes a letter to the Kentucky family court explaining that he has no attorney and asking the family court to accommodate his request that any hearings be coordinated so that he can attend by telephone, because he is out of state and has military obligations.

The family court coordinates a hearing and makes arrangements for Husband to participate by telephone. But, as so often happens, the docket gets backed up and Husband’s case is not actually heard until two hours later than was expected.

Husband is unable to participate then.

The family court proceeds without Husband, utilizing public records culled from the internet. The family court enters an order retroactive to the first of the month of the hearing.

Wife later files to have Husband held in contempt for not complying with the family court’s modified child support order.

Again, Husband, representing himself, faxes the court a motion to postpone the hearing Wife has scheduled. In his paperwork, he sometimes uses the word “stay”. Husband’s response to Wife’s papers states again that he is in the army and that he was ordered not to go to Kentucky, and explicitly invokes the Service Member’s Civil Relief Act.

Husband also sends a letter from his Commander and his Nurse Case Manager, both indicating that Husband is being treated for significant physical injuries, and is also receiving mental health services and should not have contact with Wife.

Husband also requests sanctions and a protective order against Wife and requests that his child support be reduced.

The family court ignores Husband’s efforts to invoke federal legal protections for service members, as well as Husband’s medical status and efforts to arrange counsel and telephonic participation in the proceedings. Even though Wife’s attorney does bring them to the attention of the family court.

The family court holds Husband in contempt and fines him for failing to comply with the recently modified child support order. Husband is found to be in arrears by approximately $400. The family court also orders Husband to pay Wife’s modest attorney’s fees.

Husband subsequently files to overturn the modified child support order and all the orders entered afterwards, based upon it. Repeatedly indicating that he is in the military and invoking protections under federal law.

The family court denies all of Husband’s requests to appear by phone but allows “reasonable time” for him to arrange to appear in person … or his requests for relief might be stricken or denied without his participation.

The family court then proceeds to deny Husband’s motions based upon his failure to set hearings and attend to press his motions.

Husband appeals.

On appeal, the appellate court overturns all of the child support modification, contempt and related orders entered. The family court failed to consider, as required by law, whether Husband’s inability to participate in the modification hearing would adversely affect his interests.

The Service Member’s Civil Relief Act is supposed to be construed liberally to protect service members called up to active duty to serve their country. Husband substantially complied with the Act.

The family court proceeded to the modification hearing without Husband, despite Husband’s efforts to appear, and denied his later requests to appear by phone or to obtain a continuance due to his service.

The appellate court remands for a new hearing on modification of child support, to be conducted in compliance with the Service Member’s Civil Relief Act.

Mother Jailed – Twice – for Not Getting Ten Year Old Special Needs Child Private E-Mail and Cell Phone to Use With Father

Janet Langjahr — Thu, 15 Sep 2011 00:06:00 +0000

Colorado Husband and Wife have been divorced for five years.

They have two Sons together.

Their Younger Son, now ten, has special needs and lives with Wife, a college professor and her second husband.

Their Older Son, now thirteen, lives with Husband.

A relatively unusual, but not unheard of, custody arrangement.

The Colorado family court orders Wife to create a private e-mail account for Younger Son and to get Younger Son a cell phone to use to communicate with Husband.

That was three months ago.

Wife allegedly has yet to comply with the divorce court’s order.

The family court holds Wife in contempt … and sentences Wife to ninety days in jail.

Wife is let out after four days.

Husband challenges Wife’s early release … and Wife is incarcerated for another day and a half.

Wife reportedly fears that her position has been placed in jeopardy by her confinement. She has reportedly mortgaged her home to fund hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal fees in her divorce court case.

It is unclear why Wife did not comply with the family court order and risked being held in contempt and jailed.

Wife contends that she has encouraged communication between Younger Son and Husband, and that Son calls Husband weekly. She reportedly does not comprehend the divorce court’s harsh treatment of her.

Wife also contends that Husband denies her access to Older Son and will be pursuing that in family court.

Read more in

Cohabitation Leaves Divorce in the Dust as Chief Cause of Instability for Children

Janet Langjahr — Wed, 14 Sep 2011 19:09:54 +0000

Divorce used to be the enemy of the family cited by family values advocates. No longer.

Cohabitation has since overtaken divorce by a long shot.

Social scientists associated with the University of Virginia report that divorce has returned to dramatically lower pre-1970s levels.

But cohabitation has risen even more dramatically.

Forty percent of American children will now live in a home where at least one of their parents is cohabiting with another adult.

And cohabitating couples are 170% more likely to break up by the time children in the home reach twelve years of age than are married couples.

And those children are more likely than others to use drugs, suffer from depression, be delinquent and drop out of high school.

Those children are also three times more likely to be physically, emotionally or sexually abused than other children are.

Father Allegedly Decapitates His Disabled Seven Year Old Son

Janet Langjahr — Tue, 13 Sep 2011 16:09:32 +0000

Louisiana Father and Mother have lived together for about ten years. The police have been summoned to their home on more than one occasion, and as recently as about a month ago.

They have a seven year old Son together who is disabled by cerebral palsy.

Mother reportedly leaves much of Son’s care to Father. Father reportedly resents having to care for Son, who is wheelchair bound and requires a feeding tube.

Mother goes out to attend to repairing her car.

Father allegedly murders Son by beheading him with a meat cleaver. Son’s head is left on the road which leads to the family’s home.

The rest of Son’s body is found in a trash bag nearby, the feet and one hand also severed.

Father is arrested for first degree murder and is confined. He faces the death penalty if convicted.

International Surrogacy Scheme Shut Down By Socialite Looking to Adopt

Janet Langjahr — Sat, 10 Sep 2011 05:51:52 +0000

Desperate wannabe parents for whom traditional adoption does not work can become easy prey for people looking to take advantage of them.

Recently, one of them, a wealthy Socialite, shelled out $180,000 for a baby carried to term by a surrogate mother in the Ukraine.

Only to discover that her baby and many similar “designer babies” are full siblings.

The Socialite worked with the FBI to catch the people behind these illicit surrogate contracts, including an attorney.

Read more in this New York Post article: Black-market babies may have had same mom and dad and this New York Post article: How socialite brought down black-market baby brokers

Alimony Awards Unpredictable: Canada Considers Changing That

Janet Langjahr — Thu, 08 Sep 2011 05:18:57 +0000

Canadians lament that alimony, or spousal support, is “all over the map” and unpredictable in cases where the paying spouse has high earnings, over $350,000.

In the US, some would say that alimony is all over the map across the board, regardless of the paying spouse’s income.

Why?

In a nutshell, in the US, states do not have alimony guidelines, formulae or charts to guide (or constrain) court awards, as they do for child support.

That is really the long and short of why spousal support awards may be inconsistent and unpredictable.

As in Canada, settling alimony disputes via mediation maintains greater privacy and reduces risk.

Grandparents Visitation Rights Upheld Where They Had Been Raising Child From Birth and Substantial Timesharing Was In the Child’s Best Interests

Janet Langjahr — Wed, 07 Sep 2011 12:55:43 +0000

Wisconsin Mother has Son while she is imprisoned.

Maternal Grandparents raise Son … until he is five years old.

When Son is three years old, Father files a family court case to establish legally that he is Son’s father and to win custody of Son.

Prior to trial in family court, Father and Grandparents come to a child custody and timesharing agreement granting Father custody, but also granting Grandparents substantial visitation with Son. That agreement is adopted into a visitation order by the family court.

Later, Father seeks to modify the agreed order with the intention of reducing Grandparents’ timesharing and visitation.

At trial on Father’s proposed modification, the family court does modify its previous order, but the court still awards Grandparents substantial visitation with Son, although less than previously agreed.

Father appeals, raising several technical arguments relative to a Wisconsin grandparents’ visitation statute and a landmark federal constitutional case.

On appeal, an intermediate level appeals court upholds the family court’s award of substantial school year visitation to Grandparents at trial, but reverses and remands for further proceedings as to nonschool year visitation, based upon ambiguity in Father’s court papers as to whether Father was seeking to modify visitation outside the school year at trial.

Gay Partner of Biological Parent May Win Custody and/or Visitation Rights Even Though Jurisdiction Does Not Recognize Same Sex Marriage or Civil Unions

Janet Langjahr — Mon, 05 Sep 2011 15:17:03 +0000

Nebraska Mother has Son in 2001.

Mother’s gay Partner of twenty years was actively involved in choosing Mother’s sperm donor for Son’s birth, planning and financing the in vitro fertilization, and raising Son until their breakup in 2006.

Mother allowed Partner to visit with Son for a year and a half afterwards.

Then Mother allegedly cut off all contact with Partner – for two years now.

Nebraska does not recognize gay marriage or civil unions, nor allow adoptions by gays.

Partner files for visitation and timesharing.

Prior to trial, the Nebraska family court dismissed Partner’s case for visitation and timesharing. Partner appealed.

On appeal, Nebraska’s highest court held that Partner nonetheless may argue in family court that she is a legal parent based on her course of parental conduct toward Son. This principle of in loco parentis has long been applied to stepparents and grandparents.

This ruling is consistent with rulings in several similar cases in Arkansas, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin.

The Nebraska Supreme Court remanded the case back to the lower court to take evidence in regard to Partner’s claims.

Mother Arrested for Allegedly Leaving Her Toddler Alone Outside in the Rain Outside a Bar

Janet Langjahr — Mon, 05 Sep 2011 02:58:04 +0000

Florida Mother and Father have a Toddler together.

Mother takes Toddler to a shopping center in a stroller on a weeknight.

Mother tells Toddler to stay put outside, while Mother goes to get Toddler a candy bar.

Mother allegedly enters a bar – and gets a cocktail.

Soon, it starts to rain outside.

Patrons of the bar call police about the Toddler left alone outside in the rain.

Mother is arrested.

At her first appearance in court, Mother tries to tell the presiding judge that she went to the bar to apply for a job.

Mother Alleged to Have Murdered Her Eight Year Old Son Defends It as ‘Altruistic Filicide’, a Kind of Mercy Killing

Janet Langjahr — Fri, 02 Sep 2011 16:39:04 +0000

Mother and Father have eight year old Son.

Son is autistic.

Mother is a multi-millionaire businesswoman who reportedly retired to care for Son.

Mother takes Son to posh New York hotel.

During their stay, Mother allegedly kills Son with an overdose of prescription pills.

Mother’s suicide note is found in the hotel.

But Mother is still alive, if just barely.

Their hotel suite is littered with pills.

Mother is arrested on murder charges.

Mother’s pricy defense team assert that Mother acted to protect Son from sexual abuse by Father and other abuses by “predators” in their lives – and intended to commit suicide by drug overdose after her “mercy killing” or “altruistic filicide” of Son.

It is unknown whether Mother pursued any other avenues to protect Son from the alleged abuse.

Mother reportedly has psychological challenges.

A sample of Mother’s blood, taken near the time of the murder, was reportedly lost prior to testing at the hospital to which Mother was taken. Due to legal wrangling between the prosecution and the defense, there was a significant delay after collection before testing was undertaken.

Mother has been confined since her arrest a year and one-half ago, and her most recent request for bail has been rejected.

this [UK] Daily Mail article: Uncertainty hangs over case of millionaire mother who ‘killed autistic son’ after authorities LOSE her untested blood sample

this New York Daily News article: Lawyers for Gigi Jordan, woman accused of killing autistic son, want prosecutor booted from case

Medical or Recreational Drug Use, Child Custody and Visitation

Janet Langjahr — Thu, 01 Sep 2011 12:53:20 +0000

Every state views it differently. In fact, an argument could be made that every family court judge views it differently.

What?

Drug use. By a parent.

The potential field of drugs that may be used and/or abused is broad: cocaine, methamphetamines, heroin, too many to name really … and marijuana.

The latter of which more and more states are legalizing use of for medical purposes.

Not all the same?

Perhaps, perhaps not.

Family law and juvenile dependency law often draw no hard and fast distinctions based on the particular drug of choice – or the type of use.

In family court or juvenile dependency court, the answer to whether the particular drug of choice – or the nature of the use – matters may well depend on what state you live in … or which family court judge or juvenile dependency court judge a case – your case – happens to be randomly assigned to.

Right now, in New York City, for example, the child welfare agency may be following a policy of filing civil child neglect charges against parents caught with nominal amounts of pot and/or who have admitted to authorities using marijuana in the past. In cases where law enforcement takes no criminal legal action. But makes a notification or report to the child welfare agency hotline.

Although the criminal justice system’s hands are tied from even making an arrest, such parents still face loss of child custody of their children – or restrictions on their contact with their own children – through the family court system or the juvenile dependency court system. Often without any proof of actual demonstrated neglect or harm to their children.

And their children could be forced into foster care, at least temporarily.

Child welfare agencies often maintain that even recreational or medical marijuana users may in fact neglect their children. Fail to send them to school. Leave them unattended. Otherwise suffer impaired judgment while caring for them which exposes them to danger or risk. And, of course, that may be true.

Representatives of parents, on the other hand, counter that, once such parents are on the child welfare agency’s radar due to possession of nominal amounts of marijuana or admission of pot use, the agencies then are in a position to seek other grounds to act against the parents – and, as a result, sometimes they may in fact look for those grounds – and they may in fact find them. And, if they exist, in the context of child protection, does it matter how they were identified?

Such parents ultimately face high stakes consequences. Not only as to custody and visitation and timesharing. But also restriction of their prospects for employment working with children in a variety of capacities.

In New York, this civil court record raises a cloud over such parents until the parent’s youngest child turns twenty-eight years old.

In contrast to New York, California, which has legal medical marijuana use, now requires a showing of actual harm to children before their child welfare agency may mount a juvenile dependency case for removal of the children.

Needless to say, one may take a different view of these complex cases depending upon whether one’s vantage point is parental rights or children’s rights.

When to Let Go: Practice Doesn’t Alway Make Perfect; Sometimes It Just Makes for Frivolous and/or Vexatious Litigation

Janet Langjahr — Wed, 31 Aug 2011 12:59:34 +0000

Sometimes a spouse (or parent) gets stuck on something. They just can’t turn loose of it.

They start to sound like a broken record. Maybe even a little obsessed.

Perhaps they file for a restraining order of protection against domestic violence. (Perhaps something else.)

They lose. The court denies or dismisses their petition or motion.

So, they wait a week or two and then … they file again.

Essentially the same exact allegations. Just reworded a little bit.

And again they lose. Before the same judge, of course.

Who remembers the last go-round. Perfectly.

Or maybe the spouse or parent files for substantially the same relief in their divorce or child custody case this time around.

It may be pure malice. Or it may be sincere conviction that they deserve what they are seeking …

And the judge just didn’t get it last time, but this time will be different.

Truth be told, even some attorneys may humor their clients by enabling these legal efforts.

But the truth is that the claim does not improve with repetition. Quite the contrary.

More likely, the patience of the judge subjected to the same matter yet again will be sorely tested.

And the Court’s assessment of the spouse or parent’s credibility and reasonableness may suffer. Potentially, irreparably. First impressions ….

On top of that, in at least some of those instances, the spouse or parent may also be setting themselves up to have to pay the other spouse or parent’s legal fees incurred to defend vexatious and/or frivolous litigation. In addition to their own legal fees, of course.

And, in still other cases, the spouse or parent may be exposing themselves to the prospect of a separate civil lawsuit for damages, based on malicious prosecution or abuse of process or other similar legal theory.

When your attorney (or other friendly third party familiar with your case) advises you to let something go, you should give that advice thoughtful consideration. If you still remain firmly convinced of the rightness of your position after an open discussion with your attorney or other advisor, then consider seeking out a second (professional) opinion before you dig in your heels and insist or persist.

Following this advice just may save your money – and your case. Really.

Always Get It in Writing: Girlfriend Sues Wealthy Boyfriend Over Alleged Oral Promise to Buy Her Posh Manhattan Apartment

Janet Langjahr — Tue, 30 Aug 2011 11:52:07 +0000

Billionaire eighty year old Boyfriend and famous twenty-eight year old Girlfriend are a couple for several years.

Girlfriend, a foreign actress, is now pursuing higher education in New York City.

Boyfriend, an investor and philanthropist, allegedly promises to buy Girlfriend an Eastside apartment.

Boyfriend dumps Girlfriend.

Boyfriend has a new girlfriend.

Boyfriend gives an Eastside apartment (reportedly the one chosen by Girlfriend) to his new girlfriend.

Girlfriend is angry.

Girlfriend sues Boyfriend in New York … for $50 million.

That could buy quite a few apartments, even in New York City.

Girlfriend also alleges that Boyfriend was physically abusive toward her.

Innocent Spouse Rule on Taxes Relaxed

Janet Langjahr — Mon, 29 Aug 2011 23:12:43 +0000

Way too often, clients come in who are totally in the dark about family finances.

Their spouse has been bringing home the bacon, managing the family accounts, paying the family bills, working with the family or their business accountant to prepare tax returns.

In too many instances, the breadwinning spouse orders the the other spouse to sign a joint return right now without even reviewing it. “It’s all correct, I’ve already checked, just sign it.”

That spouse may well be abusive, to one degree or another.

As a result, the intimidated spouse really has no idea how much comes in or even what brings it in, let alone the difference between gross and net and the basis for the spread.

They may – or may not – have some vague hunch that something is not quite right. But they are afraid to ask any questions, much less challenge their spouse.

And so it always comes as a rude shock that they are generally just as accountable and responsible to the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) as the controlling, breadwinning spouse.

Unless they qualify under IRS rules as an Innocent Spouse.

And under the traditional rule, it wasn’t always so easy to qualify and the relief wasn’t always so expansive.

Thanks to recent changes in the rules, it is now easier for an ignorant spouse to qualify for meaningful relief as an innocent spouse, as long as the couple is divorced or living separately for a year.

The new rule may excuse or reduce the liability of not only an unknowing spouse but also even a knowing spouse who signs a return under duress from the breadwinning spouse.

The new rule also reduces the impact of a two year time limit on claims for innocent spouse status. This change will even allow previously rejected applicants to reapply for protection.

Read more in

Authorities React Swiftly and Aggressively to Alleged Cyberstalking of Mayor’s Daughter

Janet Langjahr — Mon, 29 Aug 2011 15:02:33 +0000

Forty-eight year old New York Man falls for twenty-eight year old Woman.

Man allegedly e-mails Woman, texts her and posts on her Father’s Facebook page for work.

All told, seven lovestruck communications.

Law enforcement authorities instruct Man to cease and desist.

Man also texts New York police officer requesting assistance in reaching Woman and Father to make their wedding plans.

Man is arrested for aggravated harassment by city police as well as federal agents, and tossed in jail. Man is confined pending bail.

Impressive response from law enforcement?

Well, Father is a wealthy businessman and New York City’s mayor.

Man’s alleged conduct represents a modern, high tech twist to traditional stalking, known as “cyberstalking”. Computer and, more specifically, internet-facilitated stalking. No face to face contact or interaction required.

Man faces seven years’ incarceration.

Man’s defense reportedly is that the charges are ridiculous.

Oh, Woman has never met or even heard of Man. And Man works in a pizza place.

Man may also be charged with forging a federal judge’s signature on a court order in an unrelated matter.

How to Financially Protect an Unmarried Cohabiting Partner In Case Death – or Life Events – Parts Them

Janet Langjahr — Fri, 26 Aug 2011 17:30:46 +0000

At the moment, marriage is on the decline, at least temporarily. So, more couples are cohabiting or living together.

Generally speaking, that represents freedom from commitment and obligations.

That may be agreeable to both partners, at least for a time. But the time may come when it is not so agreeable, at least to one of them.

Yet by then it may be too late.

For example, a fifty year old Swedish author (Boyfriend) cohabited with Girlfriend. For thirty-two years.

Boyfriend and Girlfriend had no written cohabitation agreement between them and Boyfriend did not have a will.

Boyfriend wrote a trilogy consisting of three novels. He entrusted all three to his publisher simultaneously.

Boyfriend’s trilogy went on to sell kazillion copies and generate a great deal of revenue and income. Sadly, Boyfriend met an untimely death and didn’t live to see that.

At the time of Boyfriend’s death, his estate was worth about $40 million.

Under Swedish law, Girlfriend inherited from Boyfriend … practically nothing. Despite thirty-two years of living together.

Absent legal marriage or a will, a cohabiting boyfriend or girlfriend in much of the United States wouldn’t fare any better than Girlfriend.

Although it appears to have survived to some degree in Canada, the concept of common law marriage has all but faded away in many states in the US.

While both partners may have open eyes regarding their mutual day to day “freedom”, they may not intend to sign up for absolutely nothing in the event of a breakup or death twenty or thirty years into their relationship.

The bottom line is that unmarried cohabitants for the long haul, at least, would do well to ponder their legal position and potential vulnerability in the event of a breakup or their cohabitant’s death.

Even couples who wish to circumvent all the day to day obligations accompanying marriage can still take some fairly simple and straightforward steps to give their long term partner a measure of protection and comfort in the event of one’s death or departure from a lengthy cohabitation.

Those steps are:

A will or trust. A will makes provision in the event of a partner’s death. A trust can make provision in the event of a partner’s death or in the event of a breakup. But it is very important to note that a trust or will can generally be changed at any time as long as the person who made it is still alive and legally competent … without notice to someone who was previously a beneficiary. There may be circumstances and conditions that may render a will or trust irrevocable and unmodifiable. But it’s simpler and more common to go with step 2 …
A cohabitation agreement. This is a contract that spells out both parties’ understanding of their economic rights and obligations arising out of their relationship. The agreement can pertain to their breakup, the death of either partner, or both situations – as well as the death of both partners simultaneously.

Arizona Father Obtains Mediated Visitation and Child Custody Agreement in Brazil Concerning Daughter Allegedly Abducted There By Mother More Than Three Years Ago

Janet Langjahr — Thu, 25 Aug 2011 17:32:43 +0000

US Father and Brazilian Mother have Daughter together.

Back in 2008, when Mother did not have legal status in the US and the family lived in Illinois, Father and Mother were battling over custody of Daughter.

So Mother allegedly made off with Daughter to her native Brazil.

Father hasn’t seen or spoken to Daughter since.

Until recently, that is.

But a couple of weeks ago, Father, who now lives in Arizona, went to mediation with Mother regarding Daughter, in Brazil.

The mediation was different from the typical divorce or child custody mediation. Not only did Mother’s mother attend (unusual in itself), but both the US State Department (the US central authority) and the Brazilian Central Authority had representatives attend under the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction.

The marathon mediation session went on for fifteen hours. Kind of long for one session, but not altogether unheard of.

But the mediation was successful, and Mother and Father resolved custody and visitation and timesharing issues regarding Daughter.

And Father got to see Daughter for the first time in over three years.

Astonishingly, Daughter still remembered Father from before her abduction at two and one-half years of age.

And the two got to spend some quality time together in Brazil, having outings and re-establishing their father-daughter bond.

While the agreement cannot be described as overly generous to Father, it does at least provide for unlimited phone and internet-facilitated communication between Father and Daughter and for regular, if infrequent, timesharing and visitation with Daughter in Brazil until she is twelve and, thereafter, lengthier visitation and timesharing here in the US.

Meanwhile, Father continues to work on petitioning for legislation to facilitate blocking unauthorized removal of children from the US.

Mother could face federal criminal charges if she returns to the US.

Daughter is one of approximately twenty American children detained in Brazil despite the requirements of the Hague Convention.

On the other hand, Brazil claims that that about seventy Brazilian children are in the same boat here in the US.

Are Hurricanes (and Other Natural Disasters) Addressed in Your Parenting Plan or Timesharing Arrangement?

Janet Langjahr — Wed, 24 Aug 2011 03:30:21 +0000

South Florida Husband and Wife have Children together.

Husband and Wife divorce.

Husband and Wife agree on timesharing schedule which is incorporated into final judgment.

Husband moves to an apartment east of Federal Highway, close to the ocean.

Wife and Children remain in marital home west of Florida’s Turnpike, well inland.

First hurricane season since divorce arrives.

A severe hurricane is expected to arrive during Husband’s timesharing.

Husband lives in an evacuation zone and it is anticipated that authorities will encourage Husband to stay in a shelter until the hurricane passes.

Wife suggests that Children stay in their own safe secure home with Wife during hurricane.

Husband insists on exercising his timesharing with Children, maintaining that whatever happens will be a learning and character-building experience for Children.

Such scenarios play out every year in South Florida.

And many variations of it.

(Husband lives in trailer … or houseboat. Or, Husband wants to take kids out of state – or out of the country – to avoid the hurricane completely.)

Unfortunately, the odds are high that neither the marital settlement agreement or parenting plan or final judgment specifically addresses situations like hurricanes.

Which are inherently emergency situations. Stressful and wrenching. Imminent.

One parent or the other – or both – start clamoring for emergency hearings over how to deal with the hurricane.

Just not feasible in the overwhelming majority of cases.

Although it may not be top of mind when your case is being decided / negotiated, what happens in a hurricane (or other natural disaster, especially where there’s warning) is well worth considering ahead of a crisis.

After all, at the very least, your children’s peace of mind may be at risk; at most, their actual safety and wellbeing.

Modification of Child Custody in Contempt and Enforcement Proceedings is Reversed

Janet Langjahr — Mon, 22 Aug 2011 04:06:47 +0000

Florida Husband and Wife have Children together.

Husband and Wife divorce.

Florida family court awards Husband primary residential custody of Children.

It appears that Husband may not be entirely cooperative with Wife’s exercise of visitation after their divorce.

Wife seeks and obtains from the Florida family court several different orders for enforcement of her visitation and holding Husband in contempt of court for his failure to comply with the Court’s orders for timesharing with Wife. The Florida family court also awards Wife significant compensatory visitation or makeup timesharing.

Because of Husband’s obstinacy, the Florida family court, without an evidentiary hearing, ultimately modifies custody of the Children to grant Wife primary residential custody of the Children. Without even having been asked to do so.

The court makes no written findings of fact in support of its ruling.

Husband appeals the modification of Children’s custody. On appeal, an intermediate level appellate court reverses for the following reasons.

It is well-established here in Florida that children should not be punished due to their parent’s violation of court orders, or other misdeeds.
Further, contempt proceedings are to enforce compliance with previous court orders. Not to modify custody. Especially not where the parent seeking enforcement has not put the other parent on formal notice that they are even looking to modify custody.
And last, but not least, the Florida family court did not make any express findings that modification of custody would be in the best interests of the Children.

Last Year’s Domestic Violence in New York City Shoots Up Twelve Percent

Janet Langjahr — Sat, 20 Aug 2011 04:41:53 +0000

New York City reports an alarming 12% spike in domestic violence cases last year.

Domestic violence against wives, girlfriends and ex-partners climbed by an even more troubling 17%.

Domestic violence against boyfriends and husbands also grew, but only by about a more modest 5%.

Eighteen percent of cases are for violating an existing domestic violence restraining order of protection.

Part of the rising statistics is a broadening of the definition of domestic violence to include violence between cohabiting intimate partners without children in common and dating couples, including teenagers and same-sex couples. But only part.

Many attribute the greater part of the increase in violence to the fallout of the recession.

Further jumps in the statistics are anticipated as a result of relaxation of the requirements to press criminal charges for choking an intimate partner.

Oil Spill Victims May See Their Claims Paid Out By BP Seized to Pay Past Due Child Support

Janet Langjahr — Thu, 18 Aug 2011 13:12:23 +0000

In some states, enforcement of child support obligations keeps up with the times and gets increasingly creative.

Take the state of Louisiana.

Last year, it passed legislation authorizing seizure of winnings at casinos by parents behind on their child support obligations. Not entirely unique.

More recently, Louisiana has been eyeing claims paid out by BP Oil as a result of last year’s oil spill.

It turns out oil spill claims were filed by nearly 10,000 parents in arrears, who owe over $100 million in past due child support.

So Louisiana is now intercepting – seizing – their claims payments sent by BP.

Two Year Old’s Mother Challenges Family Court Award of Visitation to Criminal Defendant Under Prosecution for Child Sexual Abuse

Janet Langjahr — Thu, 18 Aug 2011 03:08:03 +0000

Pennsylvania Father allegedly sexually abuses a seven year old girl in the presence of his two year old Son, for which Father is being prosecuted.

Despite this, the Pennsylvania Family Court allows Father visitation with Son, which is supervised by a friend of Father’s.

Then Son’s Mother requests that the court suspend Father’s timesharing with Son.

And the family court does suspend Father’s visitation, temporarily, indicating that timesharing will be reinstated when proper supervision by a social worker is arranged.

Under a new Pennsylvania family law, however, a parent charged with a sex crime is reportedly required to be psychologically evaluated before any award of visitation may be made.

Mother is apparently seeking to have the family court comply with the new law.

Florida Grandmother Appeals Transfer of Custody of Her Late Daughter’s Young Daughter, Whom She Has Raised Practically Since Her Birth, to Her Daughter’s Allegedly Violent, Sex Offender Husband … Who is Not Even the Child’s Biological Father

Janet Langjahr — Mon, 15 Aug 2011 04:24:47 +0000

Florida teen (Mother) becomes pregnant.

Then marries a man (Husband) twenty-four years older than her.

Along the way, Husband reportedly pleads guilty to sexual misconduct with a minor under sixteen years of age and is required to register as a sex offender.

Husband also reportedly has a history of domestic violence and violent assaults.

Mother leaves Husband.

Husband files for divorce while Mother is pregnant. His divorce court papers explicitly deny paternity of Daughter.

Because Husband is not Daughter’s biological father.

But the divorce is never finalized.

Because one month after Daughter’s birth, Mother dies in a car accident.

Under the law, Mother’s and Husband’s divorce stops upon her death.

And, since Daughter’s biological father (Bio Father) does not come forward in any way, Husband is considered to be Daughter’s father under the law.

But Husband has no interest in Daughter at that time.

And Mother’s mother, Grandmother, takes Daughter in and raises her.

Until Daughter is almost four years old.

And Grandmother tries to adopt her.

At which point, Husband decides that he wants Daughter … and seeks primary custody of her.

And the Florida family court does indeed award Husband primary timesharing with Daughter – in Georgia, where Husband now lives.

Grandmother is appealing the ruling.

And Bio Father is now seeking to establish his paternity and parental rights over Daughter, to retrieve Daughter from Husband’s custody. And Husband is seeking to terminate Bio Father’s parental rights.

And Grandmother, of all people, is in hot water. For speaking out about Daughter’s case.

For which Grandmother may be held in contempt of court. And face incarceration.

Grandmother maintains that she spoke to the media about the case prior to the court’s gag order.

But she would be willing to do it again, now, to save Daughter from Husband.

Husband reportedly also communicates with the media – after the gag order is entered.

Read more in

Dating in an HIV World

Janet Langjahr — Sun, 14 Aug 2011 06:46:03 +0000

Canadian Man reportedly knows he is HIV-posiitive.

Man allegedly has sexual intercourse with eleven different women – without protection and without warning them of his condition.

Seven of his partners become infected with the disease. Two die.

Man is prosecuted for two counts of homicide and ten counts of aggravated sexual assault.

And convicted.

A Canadian court concludes that Man is a “dangerous offender” and may legally be confined indefinitely.

Man promises to appeal.