New York Passes Marriage Equality Act

On June 24, 2011, the legislature passed, and the governor signed into law, the Marriage Equality Act (DRL § 10-a, effective July 24, 2011).


 

The operative language is as follows:

A MARRIAGE THAT IS OTHERWISE VALID SHALL BE VALID REGARDLESS OF WHETHER THE PARTIES TO THE MARRIAGE ARE OF THE SAME OR DIFFERENT SEX.

The Act also includes extensive language to protect religious organizations and non-profits from any negative repercussions for failure or refusal to solemnize a marriage (between persons of the same or opposite sex).

 

Remember, before one gets married, it’s always a good idea to consult with an attorney about the possibility of a prenuptial agreement.  Nobody goes into a marriage (with a partner of the same or opposite sex) thinking that it is ever going to end in divorce, but it does happen!  A LOT!  Having a prenuptial agreement signed before the marriage can save quite a bit of fighting at the unanticipated end of the marriage.  And the divorce laws in New York are the same regardless of what sex the parties to the marriage are.

So, to all you people who are ready for a same sex marriage on or after July 24, 2011, WELCOME TO THE MARRIAGE CLUB!  Enjoy the rest of your life with your chosen partner!  And if the time comes when the bonds that God has created and no man should put aside need to be put aside, I’d be happy to provide you with my legal advice!

 

Tags: , , , , , ,

Father ruled competent for trial on molestation – Police Blotter – The Buffalo News

Father ruled competent for trial on molestation – Police Blotter – The Buffalo News.

 

I really cannot think of a more heinous crime than molesting one’s own children.

 

The Judge is willing to cap his sentence at 22 years if this scum takes a plea deal.  What is an appropriate sentence for repeatedly molesting your own children?

 

I would think this deserves life in prison, myself.  I’m sure certain middle-eastern countries would have a far more immediate, and permanent sentence for a person who does things like this (if the guy is guilty).

Tags: ,

World Blog – In controversial move, BBC airs assisted suicide on TV

 

World Blog – In controversial move, BBC airs assisted suicide on TV.

In New York State, like many others, assisted suicide is illegal. Some countries, Like Switzerland, permit assisted suicide, and even offer assistance to allow people to go through the final change of life in a dignified, pain free, medically supervised, and legal manner.   You can even buy a suicide kit online today! (I wonder if New York will try to collect the sales tax from your estate if you use it?)

Exactly what is New York State’s interest in keeping the terminally ill alive to the bitter end, regardless of a person’s wishes or the tremendous pain they may go through?  I honestly don’t know.

My wife’s grandfather died of mesothelioma. It was an excruciatingly slow and painful death. My wife and I visited him toward the end. He didn’t know who anyone was, but he writhed in pain in a hospital bed for more than a couple days. He was not the same proud man who attended Bill Clinton’s inauguration as an honored guest. He was not the same man who served valiantly in World War II in our navy. He was a tired shadow of himself, in tremendous pain. I have no idea if he would have chosen assisted suicide. He was religious and I think the answer would probably be no. But it might have been nice for the option to have been available.

What do you think?  Should the state be allowed to dictate your last days?  Should the state prosecute the loved ones left behind if they help?

Judge’s clerk charged with DWI after allegedly fleeing crash scene – Police Blotter – The Buffalo News

Judge’s clerk charged with DWI after allegedly fleeing crash scene – Police Blotter – The Buffalo News.

 

So, Judge Nowak is the Judge for Expedited Matrimonial Part of the Supreme Court in Erie County.

Expedited is where every divorce that is filed in Erie County goes before being sent to a trial judge.  The theory is that the Expedited part gets first crack at helping to settle cases before such time as they are set down for trial.  A divorce can be in Expedited from one day, to one year or more.  There are several Court Attorney Referee’s or Matrimonial Referees who circulate there and assist attorneys and clients in identifying the issues of the case, distilling down the contentions, and trying to negotiate a settlement.  Only when this fails is a divorce sent to a trial judge for a trial to be held.  It seems to me that a good majority of cases are settled in Expedited and only a minority go to a trial judge.  Of that minority, most of them settle at some point prior to (or even during) trial.

According to the Buffalo News, Judge Nowak’s Law Clerk, Thomas Cannavo, was arrested for: driving while intoxicated; resisting arrest; leaving the scene of a property-damage accident; and obstructing governmental administration (see link above).

Being that he is Judge Nowak’s Law Clerk, Mr. Cannavo functions as one of the Court Attorney Referees in Erie County Expedited Matrimonial part.
Given the fact that in the United States people are innocent until proven guilty, and Mr. Cannavo has not been convicted of anything, should he be allowed to continue in his duties until a verdict is reached on the charges?
Should he resign?
Should he be fired?

Tags: , , , , ,

Oh I wish I was an Oscar Meyer Weiner!

Another New York State politician down the tubes. Pretty soon, we’ll be spending more on special elections than we do on the regular ones!

What a great list we have:

  1. Elliot Spitzer -  former Governor.  At least he was stimulating the economy with his pricey whores!
  2. Chris Lee -  I honestly thought he had the best pecs of any politician… until I saw Weiner’s snapshots.
  3. Anthony Weiner -  He will always be remembered for his sage observation that he could not determine whether or not the weener in the picture was his or not.  My mind was immediately drawn back to a certain scene in the movie Porky’s, where a lineup was held, to determine the owner of the weener in question!

I just want to thank my New York State representatives, at all levels of government, for your impeccable ethics, unimpeachable sense of political correctness, and astounding lack of common sense!

And now for my solution to Anthony’s loss of memory:

Let Beulah Balbricker question him and have a lineup!

 

 

Tags: ,

In Opposition To Cafe Courts

For several years now, “Cafe” courts have been all the rage.  What’s a “Cafe” court?  It is a court specifically geared to a specific subset of persons who have been identified (by someone… anyone apparently) as requiring special services and dispensations that ordinary persons don’t get.  For instance, we have: Family Court; Integrated Domestic Violence Court (a/k/a IDV); Family Treatment Court; Juvenile Treatment Court; Veterans Court; Drug Court; Mental Health and Sex Offense Courts; and even Gambling Court.

I’m sorry I am not ready to jump on the politically correct band wagon, but my opinion is that these cafe courts are a farce.
What happened to equal justice under the law? Why is a veteran entitled to more lenient treatment than the guy who has volunteered at the City Mission every weekend for the past 25 years? Why does a cocaine addict who broke into a house and stole a TV get a slap on the wrist and referral to treatment instead of a trial and jail time? Why should a compulsive gambler who has flushed his rent payment down the one-armed-bandit toilet get special treatment when he steals $50 from the office petty-cash to give it one more pull?

Courts were never meant to “treat” people’s problems and should not endeavor to do so. Treatment is the domain of health care professionals, not judges and lawyers.

Don’t get me wrong, I think there is merit to Family Court and its less arduous procedures for solving many of the issues that arise in custody, visitation, child support, etc., situations. To do so in Supreme Court would be exceedingly expensive and time consuming. Kudos to Family Court.

However, and I am going to take some flak for this, I can find no reasonable justification for the existence of IDV Court. Actually, I would argue that there are constitutional issues raised by the existence of IDV Court which can severely prejudice people and deny them a fair trial. Take for instance the guy who is unfairly accused of harassing his wife in the course of a divorce (another politically incorrect statement, but it is usually the guy on the wrong end of IDV Court, so I’ll go with it). He gets a trial on the criminal matter before the IDV court hears the divorce. Maybe he is acquitted of the criminal charges. However, the IDV judge has heard all these horrible things about him, that don’t rise to the level required for the criminal conviction. But that judge heard all the dirt, nonetheless. Maybe a lot of that dirt would have been inadmissible in the divorce hearing. How exactly do you unring that bell? The judge heard all the bad stuff and acquitted the guy, but now the judge has all that bad stuff in his or her head while making the decisions in the divorce which occurs thereafter. I ask you… is that fair and unprejudiced? How would YOU like to be the guy on the receiving end of that decision? I wouldn’t want to be that guy! No matter how much the judge recites the sacred mantra “I am a Judge, I can disregard what I heard and make an impartial decision.” Thank you judge, but you are also HUMAN!

Shall I go on? Lets talk about Mental Health Court for just a second. I think that by definition, if someone is so mentally screwed up that they need the services of Mental Health Court, they need the services of a Psychiatrist on an urgent basis. The person should not just get a free pass and referral for services and a follow-up by the court every month. Stabilize that person, and send him or her to trial or let them cut a deal, the way everyone else has to do it. If their defense is mental illness or incapacity, they can deal with that like Muzzamiel Hassan did and have a trial… (have fun in the can, Mo! I hope you make lots of new friends!).

Drug Court: It’s a crime. Period. Don’t do it and don’t whine when you get caught and have to face the music. If that doesn’t work for you, go get some treatment or watch a few episodes of Intervention. When they take the drug laws off the books, feel free to snort that coke to your heart’s content (I’ll still take a pass on it).

We have a court system set up and it has provided answers to tough questions for several hundred years now. I honestly believe that the reason many of the cafe courts have been set up is so that politicians seeking election can point to them and say “Look what I did! Isn’t it great? Elect me!” I do not believe that one subset of people should be treated any differently under our laws than any others.

My kid goes to Tae Kwon Do a couple times a week. They start out her classes with the Pledge of Allegiance. I hadn’t said the Pledge since I was in high school before she started with those classes. The Pledge is simple, elegant, and ends with “..liberty and JUSTICE FOR ALL.” Not for some. I like the Pledge, and my kid’s Tae Kwon Do Instructor for having them recite it.

Tags: , , , , ,

Top 5 Reasons to NOT consult with a Matrimonial/Family Law Attorney

Yes, the Holidays are gone… and so is your most recent excuse for not consulting with an attorney!!!

Everyone wants to wait until after the holidays before seriously considering seeing an attorney about a divorce, or to get that increase in child support, or to go after that past due alimony.  Well, the Holidays are gone.  There’s no more excuse to hold off.  The truth of the matter is that there is NEVER a good time to deal with these major life issues.  It will be difficult if you do it in December, or after the first of the year, or the middle of June.  Feelings WILL be hurt.  Your spouse or ex-spouse or baby-daddy WILL be unhappy.  That doesn’t mean you should just live a miserable life, or let him or her off the hook for hundreds or thousands of dollars for the benefit of you or your children.

So what are my top 5 reasons to NOT consult an attorney and why are they bogus?

  1. I’ll wait until after the Holidays:   see above.
  2. I have to wait for the tax refund:  many attorneys offer free or low cost consultations; and if you’re getting divorced, you might run into problems if you grab the tax refund and use it to pay your future divorce attorney… try a credit card instead.
  3. I have to stay with him/her for the sake of the kids:  kids are resilient and remaining in a dead marriage that consists of constant unrest and unhappiness is probably grating on the kids as much as it is on you.  If it’s bad enough to consider a divorce, your kids are probably already aware there are problems.
  4. My parents/friends/neighbors/total strangers would look down on me if I got a divorce:  You are not living your life for your family or friends… you are living it for you!  Take charge of your life and throw other’s opinions in the trash where they belong.  Either get into some serious marriage counseling and address the problems IMMEDIATELY, or take the first step and call for a consult with a qualified attorney.
  5. But my spouse threatened me that he/she would take the kids/hide all the money/tell my family I’m a bad person/eat all the Cheezits in the cupboard if I got a divorce:  You should first calm down and think rationally.  It is the RARE case where one spouse gets the kids to the exclusion of the other.  It is the rare case where there is money and a reasonable good attorney cannot follow the trail to it (with the help of a forensic accountant).  It’s par for the course for your soon to be ex-spouse to bad-mouth you to anyone who will listen.  Is that repulsive?  Yes.  But you’re divorcing him or her, for the love of Pete!  Expect it.  If he or she is eating all the Cheezits to spite you, go to the store, buy yourself a new box, hide it and grin every time you munch one down (I love Cheezits!).

 

The next excuse date is tax refund time.  But I think it would be folly to wait until April or May.  Call a qualified attorney and set up a consultation TODAY!

Tags: , ,

Intro to Evidence: “I’ve Got Proof!!!” (or In Support of the Humble Document)

Fairly often, I deal with people going through a divorce who tell me “…and I have proof that he/she is cheating on me, I have a [text/voice-mail/email/telephone recording]!”   Lets face it, most people reading this probably are not lawyers and probably don’t know that the rules of evidence exist, much less what they are.  So I’m going to give a short primer on “proof” and what it means to you.

First, proof is not of much use unless you are going to have a trial.  Sure, you can threaten that you have it, and try to use it as leverage in bargaining for a settlement, but no judge will ever consider it for anything if you are not going to have a trial.  So unless you’re in trial mode (for some god-awful reason) the Judge is NOT going to consider your proof.

Second, proof is completely worthless if it is not in an admissible form.  This means the proof cannot be hear-say (hearsay is an out of court statement offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted, try and wrap your brain around that), or it must fall within one of the exceptions to the hear-say rule (there are simply too many to list here, you’ll need to go check a textbook for all the exceptions), it must be properly introduced to the Court (this is called laying a foundation, check the same textbook you looked at for exceptions to the hear-say rule, there’s probably a chapter or two devoted to introduction of evidence), it must then be offered into evidence and will be subject to voire dire by the opposing attorney (yup, check the text book for that too).  Once you jump through all these hurdles, your proof may, or may not be entered into evidence.   But you’re not finished…

Your proof will not mean too much if it is not relevant.  Your proof (whatever it may consist of) can be as iron-clad as the Tommy Lee-Pam Anderson sex tape… but if it is not relevant to your case, it is useless and will not be admitted to evidence.  So what does that mean?  It means that if you have a video of your soon-to-be-ex-husband bopping his secretary on your kitchen table while holding a copy of the New York Times up to the camera (to prove the date), and he is the one suing you for divorce and you agree that you want to be divorced and grounds are not at issue in the proceedings, the video is irrelevant and gets you nothing.

But, you say, “Chuck… that’s absurd!  I’ve got the old man bopping his secretary on MY kitchen table, and you tell me it’s worthless???  How can this be???”  I say to you, CORRECT!  The video would certainly be relevant to proving grounds of adultery, but if grounds are not at issue, the tape is irrelevant, and thus would not likely be admitted into evidence at trial.

Remember, in New York State, a divorce consists of the divorce itself PLUS dealing with the ancillary issues of child custody and visitation, equitable distribution, child support, and spousal maintenance.  The video would certainly show that soon-to-be-ex-hubby has poor taste, and probably that he’s a big jerk.  But it has little to no bearing on any of the ancillary issues (unless he was bopping away with the kids there to see it, or some other unlikely series of events unfolded around the incident).  In New York, you don’t get a bigger piece of the marital pie in equitable distribution because you were cheated on.  You might get a bigger chunk if there was wasteful dissipation or conduct so egregious that it “shocks the conscience” (as the Court of Appeals might say), but the hypothetical scenario here would not meet that criteria (yes, I know that saddens many of you).

Another thing to think about with your “proof” is how do you prove what it actually is?  So you have a picture of the dented bed-frame that your wife smashed with a baseball bat when she was trying to smash your head in, in a drunken rage?  That’s GREAT!  but the best evidence rule says you should have brought in the whole damned bed-frame.  Forget that for a second and lets talk about the picture.  The smashing happened in 1995, and you took the picture last week.  Bad news, you can only go back 5 years in a divorce.  More bad news, your wife is probably going to say “Oh no, that dent was from the time we moved into the new apartment and he dropped it going up the stairs.”   So what do you really have in that picture?  Have you got proof that your wife went nuts and tried to kill you with a baseball bat?  Nope.  But you have some excellent evidence that you have a dented bed-frame.

Lets talk about wire-tapping crimes for a minute!!!  It seems like everyone wants to tape their spouse these days.  Maybe it’s because of the easy access to electronics, maybe it’s because the moon is full, I just don’t know.  In New York, you can tape a telephone conversation so long as one of the parties to the conversation is aware that it is being taped.  I still don’t usually recommend it, for a host of reasons.  These taped conversations always sound contrived; they rarely wind up being the smoking gun that one thinks they are; and a judge NEVER wants to be bothered to listen to them at trial.  Nevertheless, I’m positive some of you will go to the Spy Outlet and put the tape recorder on your phone anyway.  So please realize, that you are going to be committing all kinds of crimes if you leave the tape recorder on the line when you are not on it, or you secretly record a conversation between your spouse and her paramour that you are not a party to.  In the end, the best advice, is don’t do the tape recording thing… it’s usually not worth the time, unless your attorney specifically tells you to do it.

Text messages– a personal favorite of mine.  So you have text messages of your husband saying he is hiding millions of dollars in a Swiss bank account and you’ll never get it.  Those will be tough to get into evidence.  First, how do you put the text message into evidence?  Sure you can get the phone records, but they only keep text messages on the servers for about 48 hours, then they are deleted.  Are you going to give the judge your phone and say “here they are, I’d like to admit my phone into evidence”???  Kiss your phone goodbye.  And besides, the judge is not going to take your phone into evidence and try to retrieve text messages from it, judges have better things to do.  Next, how do you prove who sent the text message?  Your husband is going to say he lent the phone to his buddy who sent the text as a joke.  You weren’t there to see him press the buttons, so how exactly can you prove it was your husband who sent the text?  The answer is, you probably can’t, and your proof won’t come into evidence.

Emails– see text messages.  But emails are even better, now the guilty husband also gets to say that a hacker stole his password and he hasn’t had access to that email address in two months.  Try and disprove that one in a courtroom with a judge who is late for a tee time.

All things being equal, I think that the vast majority of judges don’t really want to have to consider your proof by [voice-mail/text/email/video].  They would rather hear the testimony of the parties and see your bank records that were properly subpoenaed and submitted and prove that there is $705.49 in your checking account.  Documents are tangible, they are neat, they are something judges are familiar with, and they don’t require legal acrobatics to get them into evidence.  Judges, it seems by nature, don’t want to break new ground and be the first in the county to let text messages into evidence at trial.  They seem to dislike the necessity of setting up a TV in the Courtroom, unless it’s going to be an incredibly exciting and relevant show!  So, I advocate for the humble document.  When it comes to proof, a written document, that can be authenticated (ex. a letter signed by your husband, with the date on it, to his bank saying transfer all my assets to that Swiss account) remains the gold standard in evidence.

Tags: , , , , , , ,

No-Fault Divorce… what is it?

There has been a lot of hype around the recently passed “No-Fault” divorce law which amended § 170 of New York’s Domestic Relations Law (DRL).  But what does this mean to the average Joe (or Josette) who just wants to get divorced?

The change added a new ground for divorce as DRL §170(7) which provides as follows:

§ 170. Action for divorce. An action for divorce may be maintained by
a husband or wife to procure a judgment divorcing the parties and
dissolving the marriage on any of the following grounds:
[...]
* (7) The relationship between husband and wife has broken down
irretrievably for a period of at least six months, provided that one
party has so stated under oath. No judgment of divorce shall be granted
under this subdivision unless and until the economic issues of equitable
distribution of marital property, the payment or waiver of spousal
support, the payment of child support, the payment of counsel and
experts’ fees and expenses as well as the custody and visitation with
the infant children of the marriage have been resolved by the parties,
or determined by the court and incorporated into the judgment of
divorce.
* NB Effective October 12, 2010

This effectively means that if one of the spouses makes an affidavit that states the marriage has been irretrievable broken for a period of at least six months, that can serve as grounds for divorce.  No more people lying on the stand about how horrible his or her spouse was, and thus, no more need to prove that the death of the marriage was the FAULT of one party or the other.  Oh happy day!

So what are the potential issues with this?  As of today, nobody really knows how this is going to work!  Because this is listed as another of the potential grounds for divorce, and the statute does not explicitly state that a party making this allegation is automatically entitled to a judgment of divorce, there are some attorneys and judges who believe that an action based on the new ground can be defended, and possibly defeated in a grounds trial, just like any other alleged ground for divorce.  I foresee someone challenging this and appeals to be had in all four Departments of the State, likely going right up to the Court of Appeals (our highest court in New York).  How exactly does one prove that a marriage is irretrievable broken?  How about a judge requiring the parties to go through a Conciliation Proceeding to certify the marriage is irretrievably broken before granting a judgment of divorce?  Or perhaps marriage counseling would be required.  Would expert testimony be necessary to determine if there is any chance to salvage the marriage?   Maybe the simple affidavit attesting to the breakdown will be deemed irrefutable evidence of the breakdown.  We simply don’t know the answers to these questions yet.

Here’s an interesting observation… the statute set forth above does NOT state that the breakdown had to be in the six months immediately prior to a party filing for divorce.  The general statute of limitations on grounds for divorce (under most circumstances, but not all) is five years.  Conceivably, one could say that four years ago, the marriage had irretrievably broken down for a six month period and now I’d like my divorce please.  Ha!  That’s a fun thought!

So what about all the other mumbo-jumbo in the statute about “…shall not be granted unless…” and all the other things that have to happen before a judgment of divorce can be granted?  Well, I think it is basically superfluous nonsense, truth be told.  People will either have a settlement agreement and get the divorce, or the litigation will go something like this:

  1. Plaintiff files under DRL § 170(7) and attaches an Affidavit to his or her Summons with Notice.
  2. The Court can make Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law that the Plaintiff is entitled to a judgment of Divorce…. BUT NOT GRANT the divorce yet.
  3. The custody, visitation, support, maintenance and equitable distribution aspects of the case can be settled or tried if necessary.
  4. Once the ancillary issues are tried or settled and a decision is rendered, they can be incorporated into a Judgment which would THEN be granted, and the statute is therefore complied with, no sweat off anybody’s back.

So,where does that get us?  I think the Legislature has marched us into the 21st century and brought the last State in the Union inline with the other 49 by removing the necessity of lying under oath (not that anyone would ever do such a thing…) to get free of his or her annoying/abusive/aggravating/[insert adjective of your choice here] spouse.

In terms of real impact on the average divorce proceeding, I’m not sure it will have much of any.  The people who previously used the fault requirement to hold a spouse over the barrel in a little situation I like to think of as legalized blackmail (mean spouse would challenge grounds and push for a grounds trial unless the other spouse agreed to take less of the marital assets, in which case mean spouse would agree not to challenge grounds and divorce would sail through) will probably do the exact same thing under the new law.  The first few cases (I predict they will occur primarily in the New York City area) will likely be appealed and determine exactly how these things will work.  As of today, nobody can say for sure.  But in the other 90% of divorce proceedings, the new law will not be much more than words on a piece of paper.

Tags: , , , ,

New York Finally Passed No-Fault Divorce Law

The text of the new law can be found at Laws of New York.

§ 170. Action for divorce. An action for divorce may be maintained by
a husband or wife to procure a judgment divorcing the parties and
dissolving the marriage on any of the following grounds:

(…)

* (7) The relationship between husband and wife has broken down
irretrievably for a period of at least six months, provided that one
party has so stated under oath. No judgment of divorce shall be granted
under this subdivision unless and until the economic issues of equitable
distribution of marital property, the payment or waiver of spousal
support, the payment of child support, the payment of counsel and
experts’ fees and expenses as well as the custody and visitation with
the infant children of the marriage have been resolved by the parties,
or determined by the court and incorporated into the judgment of
divorce.
* NB Effective October 12, 2010

And THAT, is New York’s version of “No-Fault” divorce, which goes into effect on October 12, 2010.

Doesn’t look like much, does it?

The real meat of the statutes passed by the legislature on August 13, 2010 was the maintenance, attorney’s fees, and expert fees provisions.

But I will get to those in another post.

Tags: , ,