Custody Litigation

September 17, 2014 By

father's rights lawyerIn custody litigation the court must determine which parent would be better at taking care of the best interests of the child or children. Best interests of the child or children involves which parent can provide a life situation where the child will thrive and grow emotionally, intellectually, spiritually and physically. The large majority of custody issues are resolved out of court in custody agreements between the parties. However a small number of custody matters require a judge to make a decision as to which parent would be better suited to being the residential custodial parent of the child.

Preparing for Custody Litigation

Each litigant in a custody case will seek to prove it is in the child’s best interest for the child to reside with them. In order to accomplish this goal, a litigant in a custody case should obtain documentation supporting his or her claims. This documentation should show the involvement of that parent in the child’s medical needs, school, work, after school activities, family and social events, and other issues which would lead a judge to believe that parent was the primary, caring individual involved with raising the child and promoting the child’s best interests. A parent seeking custody should show his or her residence provides appropriate accommodations for the child, is within a reasonable distance of the child’s school, and the living environment the child would be exposed to is conducive to raising a child. Photographs of the place the child will live, his room, the accommodations of the home should be available to present to the court.

Who The Child Seeks to Live With

In the State of New York, in custody battles, an attorney is appointed to represent the child. The attorney for the child is supposed to meet with the child and take into consideration the child’s desires as to who he or she would seek to live with. It is this author’s opinion the child’s position as to who should be the residential custodial parent should only be considered with mature children. Unfortunately, this is not the law in New York. I have had numerous cases where attorneys for a child have come into court and advised the court who the 4 or 5 year old they interviewed would seek to live with. 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 year olds often change their minds. Sometimes 3 or 4 times during a 15 minute span.

Support System

Parents seeking custody of a child should be able to make a presentation to the court who will be taking care of the child, supervising the child, and meeting the child’s needs 7 days a week. If the parent works, he or she must present to the court a support system which would nurture the child, protect the child, and properly supervise the child when that parent is unavailable due to employment or other reasons.

The More Available Parent

Some parents have employment situations which are more flexible than others. The parent with the more flexible position can make a presentation to the judge that he or she would be available to be there for the child during school programs, after school activities, and help with homework. Judges do take a parent’s availability to nurture a child into consideration when custody issues are presented to them.

Elliot Schlissel is a father’s rights lawyer practicing law within the Metropolitan New York area for more than 35 years.Child custody attorney on Long Island

Filed Under: Fathers Rights Tagged With: , , , , ,

Guardianship of Child Granted to Father

September 15, 2014 By

Please watch today’s blog video at the following link:

Elliot S. Schlissel is a father’s rights attorney.  He can be reached at 1-800-344-6431 or by email at schlissel.law@att.net

Filed Under: Fathers Rights Tagged With: , , , , ,

Custody Change from Mother to Father: Court States This Was The Best Interest of the Child

September 10, 2014 By

helping father's win custodySupreme Court Justice John Colangelo sitting in Westchester County recently changed custody from a mother to a father. A post judgment divorce action was initiated involving a 9 year old child.

History of the Case

The mother and father were divorced in 2009. In 2010, the mother had brought a Family Court proceeding for the purpose of modifying the parenting schedule which was initially set forth in the 2009 Family Court Order. The court at that time found the facts required a change in custody. The court found it was in the child’s best interest custody be changed from the mother to the father. The father was thereafter given full legal custody and final decision making. He was also designated as the primary custodial parent. The court found the mother was incapable of promoting a meaningful relationship between the child and his father.

 

The Actions of the Mother

While the mother had physical custody of the child she did everything in her power to prevent the father from having a relationship with his son. She tried to totally separate the two. The court found her responsibility was to encourage a healthy relationship between the father and son and she did the opposite. The court therefore changed custody.

father's rights on Long Island

Filed Under: Fathers Rights Tagged With: , , , , ,

Father Given Sole Custody Due To Mother’s Interference With His Visitation Rights

September 5, 2014 By

father's rights lawyerThe Appellate Division of the Third Department, an appeals court in Upstate New York, recently rendered a decision affirming changing custody from the mother to the father based on the mother’s interference with the father’s rights to visit with the parties’ child.

The parties had initially entered into an agreement whereby the mother was given an award of sole custody. In addition, she was given a one year stay away order of protection against the father.

Father Files Petitions

The father filed a violation petition and custody petition in the Family Court. He alleged the mother had been continually interfering with his parenting time with the parties’ child. There were hearings in the Family Court. The Family Court judge found the mother had not complied with the visitation provisions in the court’s custody orders. The Family Court ordered the custody changed from the mother to the father. The father was given sole custody of the parties’ child. The mother filed an appeal.

The Decision on Appeal

The Appeals Court unanimously affirmed the changing of the custody of the child from the mother to the father. The Appeals Court found the mother had frequently violated the terms and her obligations under the prior court orders requiring her to cooperate with regard to promoting the relationship between the father and child and by refusing to give him his parenting time with the child. Instead of complying with the court orders for long periods of time, the mother simply refused to give the father visitation with the child. The mother intentionally violated court orders on a regular basis.

The Appeals panel took into consideration the fact the mother’s fitness to care for the child had deteriorated. In the end, the appeals court found it was in the child’s best interest to give the father sole custody.custody assistance for father's on Long Island

Filed Under: Fathers Rights Tagged With: , , , , , ,

Custody of Son Changed: Judge Finds Mother Cannot Be Trusted To Be the Custodial Parent of the Parties’ Son

August 29, 2014 By

Supreme Court Justice Colangelo sitting in Westchester County recently had an unusual case presented to him. In this case, the mother had paraded her son from one forensic psychologist to another. This was done in a concerted effort to destroy his relationship with this father. In addition, the mother had hired a former actress in soap operas and paid her $57,000 to help prepare her for her starring role as a witness in the custody case involving her son.

The Trial

There was a trial which lasted 18 months before Justice Colangelo. There were 25 days of testimony by the mother alone. Justice Colangelo found she was fixated on destroying the father’s relationship with the son and therefore “cannot be trusted” to make decisions regarding the parties’ son. Justice Colangelo in his decision went on to state “when left to her own devices she misused her decision making authority to trot a mentally healthy child to numerous psychological appointments clearly aimed to deprive him of a relationship with his father – a result that may have, and if allowed to recur certainly will rob [the boy] of his remaining childhood.” Justice Colangelo changed custody from the mother to the father in spite of the recommendations made by the court appointed psychologist and the attorney for the child.

Hired Forensic Psychologist

Justice Colangelo’s decision deals with the issue of parties’ to custody litigation hiring forensic psychologists to promote one parent’s arguments and with regard to the issue of trial consultants preparing witnesses with regard to their testimony. The judge found the mother was evasive during her two weeks of testimony.

Judge Colangelo indicated in his decision the mother had hired Daniel Lobel, a Westchester psychologist, and paid him $6,000 per day to prepare subjective, result oriented testimony. The judge also stated the mother had spent more than 50 hours with a psychologist, Jonathan Gould, who is a well known forensic evaluator, who helped prepare her for her interview with the court appointed forensic psychologist, Stephen Herman, from Manhattan. Justice Colangelo found the mother had met with numerous mental health professionals and a number of lawyers with regard to her desire to “deprive [the boy] of a meaningful relationship with his father.” The judge found “such a goal might have proven laudable had [the father] actually been the abusive monster [the mother] sought to depict.”

Father a Caring Man

Justice Colangelo went on to state there was no evidence presented at trial that the father was anything other than a caring, responsible man who recognized the need for both parents in the child’s life. Justice Colangelo found the mother’s behavior to be “inimicable” to the welfare of the child. The mother’s arguments that the child needed to be protected from his father were completely without merit.

Justice Colangelo in his decision went on to state “absent the imposition of some stringent boundaries on [the mother’s] prerogatives and conduct, based upon her actions to date, [the child] will surely spend the remainder of his childhood being prodded and probed by a constant parade of mental health professionals seeking to find something wrong with a healthy child who needs only a true, loving relationship with both parents.”

It should be noted the mother has appealed this decision.helping father's get custody of their children

Filed Under: Fathers Rights Tagged With: , , , , ,

Court Orders Change in Custody Due To Mother Interfering With Father’s Visitation

August 22, 2014 By

custody and visitation attorney on Long IslandThere was litigation in the Family Court between a father and a mother. The father alleged the mother had acted in an obstreperous manner, had interfered with his visitation with the parties’ children in violation of court orders and had created a situation which made it extremely difficult for the father to have visitation. The father claimed the mother’s disruptive, antagonistic behavior was not in the children’s best interest and was having a negative impact on the parties’ child.

A trial was held in the Family Court. The mother had declined to have an attorney and had represented herself during these proceedings. At the end of the Family Court trial, the Family Court Judge found there had been a change in circumstances to the extent a change in custody was warranted due to mother’s interference with father’s visitation rights. The mother appealed this proceeding.

Appellate Court Decision

The Appellate Division for the Third Department (an appeals court) upheld the Family Court’s order finding the mother in contempt and changing custody to the father. The Appeals Court found the mother had violated a prior court order with regard to the father’s visitation rights. The court also found the transfer of sole custody of the child to the father was indicated in the circumstances due to the mother’s contentious behavior. The Court found the mother was aware of the terms of the Family Court order giving the father visitation and she intentionally refused to comply with this court order.

The mother had argued she was denied her right to counsel due to the fact she represented herself. However, the appellate court found she was given the opportunity to retain an attorney and declined to do so. The court also found the mother had engaged in obstructionist behavior during the course of the Family Court trial and her responses to questions were evasive.

The appellate court affirmed the decision of the Family Court giving the father sole custody.

Conclusion

This is a major victory for father’s rights! A mother’s obligations when she is the residential custodial parent is to promote a loving, warm relationship between the children and the father. Interference with a father’s visitation rights is appropriate grounds to change custody from the mother to the father.father's rights advocate and custody modification attorney

Filed Under: Fathers Rights Tagged With: , , , , , , , ,

Grandparents and Obtaining Visitation With Grandchildren

August 19, 2014 By

Most grandparents seek to have warm, loving relationships with their grandchildren. However, sometimes the parents themselves don’t get along. In other situations, one or both of the parents have a falling out with the grandparents and punish them by preventing the grandchildren from seeing them.

Filing A Lawsuit to Compel Grandparents’ Visitation

In the year 2000, the United States Supreme Court, in a case called Troxel v. Granville, dealt with a case involving grandparents’ rights in the State of Washington. The grandparents brought suit for visitation with their grandchildren. In this case the United States Supreme Court held that parents “[have a] fundamental right to make decisions concerning the care, custody, and control of their children.” This has been interpreted as to whether a grandparent will be able to see his grandchildren is solely up to the parents.

New York Law On Grandparents’ Visitation

New York is in the forefront of states in the country with regard to granting grandparents visitation rights. The first step is for the grandparents to bring a grandparents’ visitation rights proceeding in the Family Court in the county in which the child or children are located. The grandparents can allege various arguments to establish it would be in the child or children’s best interests that the grandparents receive visitation with them. Some of the arguments which can be made by grandparents concerning this issue are as follows:

  • The grandparents have previously acted in a capacity as custodial parents for the grandchildren.
  • The grandparents have had a long and loving relationship with the grandchildren over a significant period of time. Depriving them from interacting with their grandparents will have a negative impact on the grandchildren.
  • One or both of the parents of the child or children are lacking in the basic ability to deal with issues of the grandchildren. The grandparents have the capacity to deal with these issues.
  • In some cases, grandparents can even show it will be harmful to the grandchildren to deprive them of maintaining the existing relationship with their grandparents.

Grandparents’ Rights in Divorces

When the parents of children get divorced, it is possible to include in the settlement agreement statements giving access to the children to the grandparents. Grandparents’ visitation rights therefore can be specifically built into separation agreements or settlement agreements in divorce proceedings.

Conclusion

Grandparents are unique and they don’t live forever. The relationship between grandparents and their grandchildren can have a significant affirmative impact on their grandchildren’s lives. The love and devotion grandparents have for their grandchildren, coupled with their sense of worldliness, is not something to be underestimated. Courts should be extremely reasonable in granting grandparents access to their grandchildren.grandparents' rights advocate in Metropolitan New York

Filed Under: Fathers Rights Tagged With: , , , ,

False Allegations of Child Abuse

August 12, 2014 By

father's rights advocateA disgusting tactic sometimes used against men when the children’s mother perceives there will be a custody dispute is to file false allegations of child abuse and/or domestic violence against the other parent. Courts tend to take these allegations seriously. In my experience, false allegations of both domestic violence and child abuse are made by both men and women. However, they are used much more often by women and courts take allegations of domestic abuse against women more seriously. This turns out to be a tactic with very little downside risk. The reason for this is courts do not usually punish individuals who make false allegations of domestic violence and child abuse.

Child Protective Service investigators and the police tend to believe the accuser. They often ignore the credible explanations made by the individual who is accused of either domestic violence or child abuse.

Control

The tactic of making false allegations of either domestic violence or child abuse has to do with controlling the family situation. In many cases, the false allegations of abuse are part of a program of Parental Alienation Syndrome (hereinafter referred to as “PAS”). The individuals making the false allegations of child abuse are not taking into consideration the long term impact this will have on their children. They are doing this for inappropriate, selfish reasons.

When a mother makes false allegations of child abuse, the father is usually thrown out of the house. This gives the mother exclusive occupancy of the home, control of the home’s assets, and control of the children. The man is put out on the street with just the clothes on his back. He needs to get a court order just to get back in the house and get the rest of his clothing.

Keeping Children From Their Father

After allegations of child abuse are made and a temporary order of protection is issued by a court, it can take weeks and sometimes months until the father has contact with his children again. Children who have not had contact with one of their parents for a considerable period of time sometimes become tentative and shy. If the allegations of child abuse are accompanied by the mother filling the children’s heads with false stories of abuse and neglect, the children can become fearful of their father.

My Way

In the end, the parent making the false allegations of child abuse is saying to the other parent, everything will be done my way. If you don’t do what I say, the way I tell you to do it, you are never going to see your children. Who suffers in the end? Both the loving parent kept away from his children and the children. PAS is a terrible syndrome and it can take long term therapy to deal with this problem if it is not nipped in the bud.helping father's with legal issues to see their children

Filed Under: Fathers Rights Tagged With: , , , , , ,

Parental Alienation Syndrome: What Is It?

August 8, 2014 By

Parental alienation syndrome, which is often referred to as “PAS”, involves a type of behavior of one parent which is designed to disrupt the relationship between a child or children and the other parent. The deprivation of children of a loving relationship with one parent by the other parent can cause the children to experience psychological distress, and the destruction of the relationship with the other parent. When one parent alienates children from the other, this is a type of child abuse.

PAS And How It Is Accomplished

The usual first steps of one parent alienating children from another involve the interference with the non-custodial parent’s rights to have visitation and personal contact with the children. The residential custodial parent is technically obligated to foster the relationship with the children and the other parent. However, in PAS situations, instead of working with the other parent to build a harmonious, loving relationship with the children, one parent interferes with the parenting time and communication of the other parent with the children.

Inappropriate Comments

Negative statements made by the residential custodial parent such as the other parent has abandoned us, has cut us off from money, is a bad person, and similar statements confuses the children and has a negative impact on the children’s respect for the other parent. These actions by the residential parent have a subliminal effect in casting the other parent as a bad, evil, inappropriate person. Even when the children want to maintain a relationship with the other parent, the conflict created by the custodial parent between the custodial parent’s representations concerning the other parent and the children’s love and affection for the other parent creates a conflict that children have difficulty dealing with. What the residential parent is actually doing to the children is conveying his or her negative feelings, dislike and hatred of the other parent to the children and convincing the children to adopt those negative feelings.

Repetition

When the custodial parent continually repeats negative statements, and/or negative incidents to the children concerning the other parent, these statements, even if untrue, end up being accepted as factual by the children. The children replace his or her warm, loving experiences with the other parent with false experiences which destroy the relationship with the other parent.

Conclusion

PAS damages children. Parents who hate each other should not confuse their children or subject their children into being brainwashed into believing they hate the other parent too. Children should love and respect both of their parents.father's rights advocate on long island

Filed Under: Fathers Rights Tagged With: , , , , ,

Judge Reduces Wife’s Equitable Distribution Due to Bad Behavior

August 4, 2014 By

father's rights lawyer on long islandThis is a story about an acrimonious divorce between two lawyers, Ira Schacter and Janice Schacter. Ira was a partner at Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft, a prestigious Manhattan law firm. Janice had gone to law school and worked as an associate at a law firm that handled personal injury cases. She had stopped practicing law after her daughter was born.

The Case

The case was presented before Manhattan Supreme Court Judge, Laura Drager. In discussing the case, she referred to it as “one of the most contentious litigations this court has ever presided over.” Judge Drager took into consideration Janice’s bad behavior and awarded her only 17% of Mr. Schacter’s valuable partnership at the Cadwalader law firm. Judge Drager stated in her decision “in essence the wife chose to bite the hand that fed her. Although the court recognizes that the wife feels she was badly treated by the husband, her repeated attacks against him have played a part in a diminishing of his income.”

The attorneys for Mr. Schacter argued his wife’s conduct during the course of the divorce “has so interfered with his ability to retain clients that she actively caused the value of his partnership interest to decline.”

ACS Claims

During the course of their litigation, Ira was the subject of seven separate investigations by the Administration for Children’s Services. ACS investigators visited his home more than 100 times. Each time they investigated him, they found the allegations made by his wife against him were unfounded.

Judge Drager found Janice had been involved in a number of instances creating negative publicity for her husband. She had regularly posted negative information with regard to her husband on websites.

Although Judge Drager only gave the wife 17% of the value of Mr. Schacter’s partnership, the Judge valued the partnership at $4,170,000. Therefore Ms. Schacter’s 17% share was $855,000. In addition, Mr. Schacter paid his wife’s attorneys’ approximately $460,000 and paid $70,000 in the wife’s expert fees. Mrs. Schacter also received a share of the parties’ $4.1 million house located in the Hamptons, a portion of the $4.4 million townhouse in the city, and equitable distribution of Mr. Schacter’s retirement accounts, cars, and other assets.

Conclusion

The judge’s comments about Mrs. Schacter who bit the hand that fed her says it all!divorce attorney for fathers

Filed Under: Fathers Rights Tagged With: , , , ,
« Previous Page
Next Page »