Husband Awarded 50% Equitable Distribution of Family’s Assets

April 8, 2014 By

In a recent case in Queens County, a wife had brought a divorce case against her husband. She was successful in the divorce proceeding and the husband appealed. The Appellate Division Second Department (an appeals court) reversed a decision of the Judicial Hearing Officer. The case was sent back for a retrial on the issue of husband’s contributions to the marital estate related to his request for equitable distribution of the marital assets.

Appeals Court Decision

The Appellate Division in its decision had said the Judicial Hearing Officer’s decision was “patently unfair” to the husband. The wife’s position in the second trial was basically the same as in the first. She presented legal argument her husband should not receive equitable distribution of the marital assets. She claimed he was “lazy and did odd jobs.”

The court, after a hearing, found the wife was the moneyed spouse. She was working as a micro-biologist and received a substantial income. During the course of the marriage, the husband took care of the parties’ marital home. He also raised the parties’ son. In addition, he found parcels of real estate that needed to be fixed up as investments.

Decision After Rehearing

Judge Pam Jackman Brown sitting in Kings County held the husband had made significant non-economic contributions to the marital estate. As a result of the husband’s non-economic contributions, the parties were enabled to live a “lavish lifestyle.” She also found the husband’s actions helped promote the wife’s career. Judge Jackman Brown went on to find in her decision the parties’ wealth and lifestyle related to the husband’s insight with regard to the acquisition of lucrative buildings that resulted in significant profits. She concluded the evidence supported the husband’s request for a 50% share of equitable distribution of all of the marital assets. This is based on his non-economic contributions to the home and raising the parties’ child.

Conclusion

assistance for fathersStay at home dads can play important rolls in their marriages entitling them to significant equitable distribution of the parties assets in a divorce.

Elliot Schlissel and his staff of father’s rights lawyers have been protecting father’s rights for more than 45 years.

Filed Under: Fathers Rights Tagged With: , , ,

Wife’s Request for Attorney’s Fees Substantially Reduced

April 3, 2014 By

dads' rights attorneyIn a divorce action before Justice Stacy Bennett in the Supreme Court Matrimonial Part in Nassau County, Justice Bennett was presented with a case involving an application for substantial attorney’s fees. The wife and the husband in this divorce case had resolved all issues concerning joint custody of the parties’ children and they had agreed to a value of the husband’s interest in his medical practice. There was a trial and husband was granted a judgment of divorce. However, there were outstanding financial issues that still needed to be resolved. One of these issues was the wife’s application for legal fees.

Wife Minimally Contributed to the Marriage

Justice Bennett in her decision discussed the wife’s contributions during the parties’ sixteen year marriage. She found that the wife had actually had very minimal contributions. Justice Bennett in her decision stated the wife didn’t clean or cook at the marital residence. The wife had the benefit of nannies who took care of the children. Justice Bennett found the wife’s direct contributions to the husband’s business were extremely limited. She found all the wife did was host an annual holiday party or a picnic. As a result of the wife’s minimal contributions to the husband’s business, she awarded the wife a 15% interest in the husband’s medical practice.

Wife’s Request for Attorney’s Fees

Wife submitted a request for attorney’s fees of approximately $573,000. Attorneys for the husband argued these attorneys fees were excessive and unreasonable. They argued the case was relatively simple and attorneys fees of this nature were completely unjustified. Justice Bennett upon reviewing the facts of the case held the amount of attorneys fees was indeed unreasonable. She awarded the wife $150,000 of attorneys fees to be paid by the husband to her attorneys.

advocate for dadsElliot Schlissel, Esq., is a father’s rights lawyer with more than 45 years of experience representing fathers throughout the Metropolitan New York area.

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

Father Granted Physical and Legal Custody of Daughter

February 21, 2014 By

father's rights attorneyJudge Michelle Schauer sitting in the Family Court in Westchester County recently dealt with a difficult custody case. The father and mother of the child, Madison, were not married. Both of them had submitted applications to the court for sole legal and physical custody of their daughter. A custody agreement was worked out. The agreement had a parenting plan in it. Shortly after the agreement was executed, the father brought a proceeding in the Family Court of Westchester County before Judge Schauer claiming the mother had violated the terms of the parenting plan contained in the custody settlement agreement.

Mother’s Behavior Concerning Child Questioned by Court

Father alleged that the child’s day care provider had raised serious concerns about the mother’s behavior at the time her diaper was being changed. An investigation was undertaken by the Administration for Children’s Services. The investigation determined that the allegations regarding sexual abuse of the child were unfounded. In spite of this determination, Judge Michelle Schauer granted the father temporary custody. The mother had argued that there was no change in circumstances involving the child, Madison, that would suggest that a temporary change in custody was needed. However, during the course of the proceedings, the mother’s older daughter revealed to a teacher that she had been molested. An issue was presented to the court that because of her being molested she might become a perpetrator who would sexually molest Madison. The court felt the mother had exhibited a complete inability to recognize and deal with her older daughter’s serious emotional problems. The judge stated in her decision this was a significant factor in making a determination it was in Madison’s best interests to give custody to the father. The court specifically found the father was the more fit parent. He was granted sole legal and physical custody of Madison. The mother was granted visitation with the child.

custody help for fathers

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

Husband Allowed to Have Wife Removed from Residence

February 18, 2014 By

father's rights lawyerDuring a divorce lawsuit, a husband provided the court with documentation the parties’ home was moving towards foreclosure. The court appointed the husband as a receiver and gave him authority to list the home with real estate brokers and conduct the sale of the home.

The wife did not accept the court’s initial ruling and brought a motion to renew or reargue the court’s prior decision concerning the husband being entitled to sell the home to avoid it being sold in foreclosure. The wife claimed in her application to the court he had failed to abide by a court order to make timely payments of the mortgage obligation on the home. She claimed that there were funds available for the husband to pay the mortgage in his 401(k) plan.

Home Handicapped Accessible

The wife argued extensively that their home was handicapped accessible. She claimed she needed to live in this handicapped accessible home and the judge should allow her to continue to live there.

The husband asked the court to keep him as the receiver of the home and allow him to have his wife removed from the home to facilitate his ability to list the home for sale and have the home sold.

Wife Interfered in the Sale of the Home

Justice John Bivona sitting in the Supreme Court Divorce Part in Suffolk County granted the husband’s application. The judge found that his wife had been interfering in the sale of the marital home. As a result of her interference, the parties were suffering economic waste of a valuable marital asset.

Conclusion

helping fathers during trialThe judge in this case felt it was in the parties’ best interests to maximize the return on the sale of the marital residence by having it sold privately instead of being sold in foreclosure where it would go for less than fair market value.

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

Social Media Websites and Divorce Proceedings

January 16, 2014 By

father's rights lawyersRecently questions have arisen as to whether social media websites are having an impact on increasing the divorce rates in the United States. There are many social media websites, such as MySpace, Twitter, Facebook, Flickr, Photobucket, and numerous other ones. Increasingly, lawyers and investigators are obtaining information from social media websites with regard to spouses carrying on elicit affairs and romances during the course of their marriage. Access to an individual’s social media websites can provide all types of information concerning their social activities. In a recent survey of attorneys who are members of the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers, it was found that there has been a significant increase in number of divorce cases which have utilized evidence obtained from material posted on social media websites by parties to the litigation.

Private Investigators Use Social Media Websites

In the old days, it was necessary to hire a private investigator to investigate the private life of a spouse who may have been committing adultery. Today, investigators instead of going into the field with a camera and/or snooping around motel rooms search through photo files, comments on walls, information on the individual’s profile pages, and all types of other information gleamed from social media websites. Photos taken from social media websites are increasingly finding their ways into court proceedings.

It is said a photo is worth a thousand words. Unfortunately, the wrong photo can be the basis of a divorce proceeding. In addition, photos have been utilized by criminal attorneys in driving while intoxicated cases to show dependence on alcohol or inappropriate drinking habits. Inappropriate behavior demonstrated by material taken from a social media website can be used in divorce proceedings to document an individual would be a poor choice to be the custodial parent. This can be an effective technique to obtain evidence in child custody and child support proceedings.

In addition to the utilization of photographs in court proceedings, incriminating and/or inappropriate photographs are also used by attorneys in negotiating out of court settlements in divorce and family court litigation. There are many cases of compromising photographs on websites creating pressure in negotiations to force settlements in divorce cases.

Social Media Website Used for Flirting

In 2008, a study was done entitled “The Pew Study of Internet and American Life.” One of the interesting results of this study was it was found that 20% of all adults interviewed in the study who maintained online social media websites stated they had flirted with others on these websites.
Jason Krafsky has written a book called Facebook and Your Marriage. In his book, he claims that spouses need to set limits on what they utilized social media websites for. He recommends in his book spouses share passwords and user names. He suggests this so they can each check what each other is doing on social media websites. He specifically recommends spouses do not maintain communication on social media websites with ex-lovers. He claims this can lead to misunderstandings and have a negative effect on the marital relationships.

finding evidence to help husbands in divorceElliot S. Schlissel is a father’s rights lawyer practicing in the Metropolitan New York area. His office represents fathers on issues concerning child custody, child support, spousal maintenance and the division of property in divorce proceedings.

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

Stay at Home Husbands

January 14, 2014 By

father's rights lawyerThere was a recent article in the New York Times, Sunday Edition, which stated super achieving moms on Wall Street have house husbands. This article examined the phenomenon of stay at home husbands. The article stated there has been a thousand percent increase since 1980 in the number of women working in finance on Wall Street who have stay at home spouses. The article pointed out the stay at home spouses allowed the women to be successful without having the responsibility of maintaining their household and raising their children.

It is not unusual for successful women who work in large law firms to rely on a man to help take care of the children, deal with the family’s meals, and supervise the household chores. It is common for partners in large New York City law firms to either be single or to be married to someone who relieves them of their responsibilities in the home.

Successful women are sometimes embarrassed to admit their significant others are raising their children and maintaining their home. There are a variety of reasons for this. They are concerned in the event of a break up of the relationship their significant other will get custody of the children.

Changing Gender Stereotypes

When a woman is the primary breadwinner, and the man maintains the home and takes care of the children, there is a change in gender roles. In some of these cases, men are reluctant to acknowledge they have exchanged the roles played by them and their female companion. However, in an economy where jobs are hard to find, the house husband should be grateful he has a very successful wife, or significant other, earning enough money to pay all of the family’s bills and to maintain the family at a reasonable standard of living.

Conclusion

Family life requires sacrifices. If one spouse is the primary breadwinner, it is not unreasonable for the other spouse to maintain the household and help raise the children.

Elliot S. Schlissel is a father’s rights lawyer. He has been representing fathers in divorces and helping fathers with custody issueschild custody cases and child support cases for more than 45 years.

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

Center for Urban Families in Baltimore Helps Fathers

October 11, 2013 By

fathers rights lawyerBaltimore has a program run by the Center for Urban Families designed to help fathers reestablish relationships with their children. The Center helps fathers find jobs as part of their programs. Since its inception, hundreds of fathers working with the counselors in this program have learned to become more responsible parents and reestablish relationships with children whom they had abandoned.

Joe Jones, the Chief Executive Officer and founder of the program, recently stated “what we want to do is get these people above ground and back into the mainstream.” In addition to helping fathers find jobs, the Center takes action to end what Joe Jones refers to as “the cycle of father absence.” The Center seeks to break the cycle of fathers not being responsible for their children.

Children Raised Without Fathers

In 2012, the American Community Survey which was undertaken by the United States Census Bureau showed approximately 19 million children across the United States live in homes without a father.

Many men who come into the Center grew up in homes without fathers. Studies show children who are raised without fathers have a greater likelihood of parenting children during their teens. In addition, children raised without fathers have higher instances of drug abuse and being involved in criminal activity, pursuant to the National Father Initiative. It is the goal of the Center’s Responsible Fatherhood Program to provide men the support system and the basic tools they need to become responsible parents for their children. The program teaches fathers a variety of parenting skills including how to be financially responsible for their children.

About the Founder – Joe Jones

Joe Jones’ father left when he was 9 years old. Jones became a drug addict. He spent more than 17 years taking drugs, selling drugs and committing crimes to support his drug habit. When Jones was 21 years old he had a son. He took no responsibility for the child. In 1986, Jones was convicted of a variety of drug related criminal offenses. He was placed in a residential rehabilitation program. After completing the program, Jones went to Baltimore City Community College and obtained an Associate’s Degree. He worked for a series of non-profit organizations in Baltimore. During this time he realized there were no programs to help fathers. In 1992, he founded the Men’s Service Program at the Baltimore Department of Health. Seven years later he founded his own non-profit organization, The Center for Urban Families. He took this action because he felt he needed to give something back to the community for helping him restart his life. Jones claims to become a better father, you need to become a better man!

help for fathers

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

Internet Downloaded Separation Agreement Found Valid

September 30, 2013 By

father's rights lawyerIn a recent case before Justice Leonard Steinman sitting in the Supreme Court Divorce Part in Nassau County, a husband had filed a divorce action against his wife. In this proceeding, he sought to incorporate by reference a separation agreement into the judgement of divorce. The wife argued the agreement should not be allowed to be incorporated into the judgement of divorce. She claimed she was induced by fraud into signing the agreement.

A motion was made to determine whether the agreement was valid. The Court found the agreement was drafted by the wife. She found the agreement on an internet website. After downloading and printing the agreement she presented it to the husband, he executed it.
The agreement had a waiver of spousal maintenance. It also stated there would be “no demand for child support payments”. The agreement required the parties sell the marital home and equally divide the proceeds. Pursuant to the terms of the agreement, the parties opted out of exchanging financial net worth statements. Neither the husband nor the wife were represented by an attorney during the course of the negotiation and execution of the agreement. However, the parties did properly execute the agreement before a notary public and they filed it with the County Clerk of Nassau County.

The Agreement Terms Were Followed

The Court found that the parties had followed the terms of the agreement after its execution. The Court found the parties had lived separate lives. They did not share a bedroom together. They also filed separate tax returns.

The Court found the separation agreement executed by the wife was not unfair or inequitable. The judge ruled the wife’s claims that the parties did not intend to be bound by the agreement were undercut by “its unambiguous terms.” He made this decision even though the wife waived spousal maintenance in the agreement.

It should be noted, the husband acknowledged that the child support provision does not comply with the Child Support Standards Act. However, he agreed that this could be severed from the agreement and the rest of the agreement could be enforced.

Justice Steinman found the agreement to be valid and incorporated it into the judgement of divorce.

Conclusion

In this case, the wife wanted to have her cake and to eat it too. She drafts an agreement and then decides later on she wants more. Justice Steinman found she was not entitled to a second bite at the apple. This is a case where men’s rights were protected.advocate for father's rights

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

Divorce Case: Equitable Distribution After Death

September 27, 2013 By

father's rights attorneysRecently, Supreme Court Justice Stacey Bennett sitting in a Matrimonial Part in Nassau County made a decision in an unusual case. A husband started a divorce lawsuit. He was granted a judgment of divorce in this proceeding. Both parties after the divorce were to submit post trial briefs to the court regarding all outstanding economic issues. Then, the husband committed suicide. The wife claimed suicide didn’t stop the divorce action from going forward because the judgement had already been rendered.

Husband Tries to Deny Wife Equitable Distribution

The husband, a physician, in an attempt to deny his wife and children equitable distribution of millions of dollars in assets and life insurance that he possessed, decided to kill himself. At the time the husband committed suicide he was aware he had advanced brain cancer and did not have a significant time to live. Prior to committing suicide the husband changed the beneficiaries on his $2,000,000 life insurance policy and $3,000,000 in his investment accounts. In violation of the court’s order he changed the beneficiaries from his wife and their son and named his mother, who is the executrix of his estate, and his sister as beneficiaries. The suicide took place after each of the parties had rested their presentation to the court but before a final judgment had been entered.

The legal question presented was whether the suicide abated the divorce (stopped it from moving forward) and prevented the Supreme Court Judge handling the case from making a decision on equitable distribution of the assets.

Judge Bennett held “suicide, like murder, is an intentional act and the husband’s estate should not be able to benefit from it by seeking an equitable remedy.” Judge Bennett went on to write in her decision “consequently in the interest of justice, equity and the efficiency of the Court system, this Court finds the right to equitable distribution in this action survives the husband’s suicidal death.”

The husband’s attorney claimed the case needed to be dismissed because the husband was dead. The dismissal of the case after one of the parties dies is called abatement. However, Justice Stacey Bennett said this case didn’t abate because the divorce had been granted already. Justice Bennett’s decision was that she still had jurisdiction to finalize all the remaining economic and financial issues in this divorce proceeding even though the husband died before equitable distribution took place. Justice Bennett took the position the entry of the divorce itself was merely a ministerial act. The case was to continue even after the husband’s death on the issue of equitable distribution.

Novel Legal Question Presented

The legal question presented to Judge Bennett was a novel question of whether an intentional suicide stops a divorce action and whether the issues that were not resolved prior to the death involving equitable distribution survive the death. Judge Bennett wrote, “here, the husband committed suicide and thus those who now represent his interests come to the court with unclean hands”. Judge Bennett’s position was the suicide was specifically designed to prevent the wife and child from receiving the decedent’s assets. Judge Bennett’s decision said the husband’s committing suicide “demonstrated a nefarious pattern of conduct on part of the husband designed to deprive his wife and children of any assets.”father's rights advocate

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

Unfair Prenuptial Agreement Thrown Out

August 19, 2013 By

family law attorneysE.N. entered into a prenuptial agreement with A.N.  E.N., a woman, had been a receptionist in a law firm that handled divorce cases. The prenuptial agreement was drafted by her husband’s lawyer. She had virtually no impact in the agreement. She hadn’t read the final draft of the agreement.

Acting Supreme Court Justice Victor Alfieri, Jr., sitting in Rockland County, held “the agreement was completely one-sided.” “Plaintiff thought the purpose of the prenuptial agreement was to protect defendants’ individual and joint bank accounts. There was never any discussion between the two of them about plaintiff waiving her rights to spousal maintenance, insurance benefits, his pension or his estate should he predecease her.” The Judge went further to state “plaintiff did not see a copy of the agreement prior to signing it, nor did defendant’s attorney explain it to her prior to her signing it.”

History of Relationship

A.N and E.N met in 1994. Their engagement lasted 2 years. A.N. insisted on a prenuptial agreement prior to getting married to E.N. E.N. thought the agreement just would deal with waiving her rights to A.N.’s bank accounts which he held jointly with his mother.

A.N. had his attorney draft the prenuptial agreement. Although E.N. agreed to sign the agreement without reading it based on A.N.’s statements he would not marry her unless she signed the agreement.

Divorce Proceedings

A.N. filed a lawsuit against E.N.  E.N. brought an action to set aside the prenuptial agreement. The Judge found that E.N. had “no input” in the prenuptial agreement’s terms. The Judge also pointed out in his decision she was not represented by counsel during the negotiations and the execution of the agreement. In the end, the Judge found, based on all the facts in the case, the prenuptial agreement should be set aside because it was unconscionable, involved over-reaching and duress.

Conclusion

Both parties should always be represented by a family law attorney prior to entering into a prenuptial agreement. There should also be full disclosure of assets, debts and a full explanation of the terms and conditions of the agreement by the attorneys for each of the parties prior to their executing the agreement.father's rights advocate

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