Child Custody

Divorce Trial Summations or Closing Statement

October 22, 2017 | Law and Mediation Office of Darren M. Shapiro, P.C.

A divorce case will often be an emotional and complicated time for everyone involved. Feelings are hurt, and insome cases, sadness spurred by the end of a marriage can turn into anger, making the experience of litigation even harder to handle for those involved. While I am a strong believer in alternative dispute resolution through processes like mediation or collaborative law for couples willing and able to go those routes, often, litigation is the process used. As a divorce lawyer and child custody attorney, it’s my responsibility to help the people dealing with the complications of divorce to present their case as clearly, calmly, and effectively as possible in front of a New York judge. Often, this will mean telling a story on the behalf of the client, that begins with an opening statement, continues through to a body featuring witness testimonials, direct, and cross examination, and finishes with a closing statement.

From the very beginning when I start working with a client on their divorce case, we will discuss their circumstances in detail with them, and at times writing what I like to call “golden nuggets” of information down in the trial folder, so that we can refer to them later. This allows me to know what kind of story I want to tell throughout the course of the case, although it’s important to listen carefully to what the witnesses, and opposing lawyer says throughout the experience, as this can sometimes alter the considerations that need to be considered when presenting a divorce summation. Continue reading ›

Using Cross Examination in New York Divorce Trials

October 14, 2017 | Law and Mediation Office of Darren M. Shapiro, P.C.

Although the nature of divorce trials can change from one case to the next, it’s worth noting that divorce attorneys and child custody lawyers like myself often use a very specific set of techniques when presenting our case to the court. Those techniques allow us to create a story for the judge to follow, beginning with an opening statement that explains the nature of the state, then moving onto direct and cross examination. While direct examination is a process used by divorce attorneys to question our own witnesses and establish context within a trial, cross examination is a strategy that’s more focused on changing the perspective of the court to suit our specific client.

During a cross examination, divorce lawyers such as myself ask witnesses essential to our client’s case to provide an in-depth account of the facts that support the case presented by whichever party called the witness to begin with. Cross examination allows opposing lawyers and perhaps the attorney for the children, if there is a custody dispute, to ask questions of the witness, in an attempt to reveal information that’s beneficial for their clients. For instance, as a cross-examiner in a divorce case, I might use carefully-worded questioning to draw light to points that present my client in a good light. For instance, I could ask the witness to reveal something positive that my client did, or draw more attention to the bad behavior of the opposing party. Continue reading ›

Using Direct Examination in Divorce Trials

October 8, 2017 | Law and Mediation Office of Darren M. Shapiro, P.C.

As a child custody lawyer, divorce attorney, and family law lawyer, I’ve been involved with several different divorcetrials across Long Island and New York. While the specifics of these trials might change from couple to couple, it’s worth noting that the formats and many strategies attorneys typically use to present a case in front of a judge or jury have similarities. One of the most important elements involved in a divorce trial is the process of “direct examination”. This is the method that lawyers like myself use to outline facts and introduce exhibits, through our witnesses for the person we’re representing in any specific divorce case.

In the legal world, the concept of direct examination is used to refer to circumstances within a litigation trial, where the attorney questions his or her own witness to help give greater context and detail to a situation. After one side questions their witness on direct examination then the lawyers for the other parties, such as opposing counsel and sometimes the attorney for the child or children question the cross examination, where both attorneys can ask questions of the witness for the trial. I typically use direct examination as a way of getting to the bottom of the story with a witness, uncovering as much vital information as possible that can be used to support my client. Continue reading ›

What to Know About Divorce Trial Opening Statements

October 2, 2017 | Law and Mediation Office of Darren M. Shapiro, P.C.

A marriage is about joining two lives together at multipledifferent touchpoints. When you agree to a marriage, you interweave almost every aspect of your life with your partner. For that reason, when a divorce takes place, it can be very complicated to untangle the situation, and make sure that both people come away feeling in-tact, and secure. While some cases of divorce can be handled with alternative dispute resolution strategies like mediation and collaborative law, some will eventually find themselves in front of the New York court. If your divorce requires litigation, then it’s worth understanding the different elements of a divorce trial, which you may need if your case does not settle ahead of time.

The opening statement for a divorce trial is basically the introduction to your case. It gives the judge context that they can use to understand the story behind your divorce. Petitioning parties in New York courts provide their opening statement to begin with, before the responding party has their opportunity. The important thing to remember about opening statements is that they’re generally not argumentative. Divorce lawyers like myself are not permitted to comment on the credibility of the other side during these statements, nor can we craft a story in an attempt to appeal to prejudice or passion. Continue reading ›

Summation or Closing Statements in Child Custody Trials

August 26, 2017 | Law and Mediation Office of Darren M. Shapiro, P.C.

There are various elements involved in ensuring the best results froma child custody case. Closing statements are one of the unique and valuable opportunities that child custody lawyers use when attempting to present their side of the story to the judge. Because managing a case with children involved can be particularly tricky, a summation or closing statement can provide a memorable way to draw all the facts of the case together into something that the judge can use to make their decision. Otherwise known as a “summation”, a closing statement, when performed by an effective child custody lawyer or divorce attorney, can sweep away any pre-existing feelings that the judge had, and replace their thoughts with a new insight into a custody case and why their clients desires are in the best interests of the child or children. After all, that is what a child custody and parenting trial is all about.

To some degree, a closing statement is similar to an opening statement. For instance, in both the opening and closing statements, the attorneys for both parties will have the opportunity to directly address the judge, and “discuss” the case, giving them a framework for understanding the role of each party in the case, and how the evidence should be considered. However, a closing statement can involve arguments that allow the child custody attorney to make their point more effectively, whereas an opening statement requires the lawyers for both sides to stick to the facts. Though arguments can be made about the evidence and how it was presented to help sway the judge or undermine the other party’s case, it’s worth noting that there are rules to follow. Continue reading ›

How Do New York Courts Deal with Out-of-State Custody Orders?

August 16, 2017 | Law and Mediation Office of Darren M. Shapiro, P.C.

After a divorce is finalized, the former husband and wife will go their separate ways. When the former couple has children together, this may result in one of the parents leaving the state with the children. While the state overseeing the initial divorce proceeding generally issues an initial custody order, that order is subject to revision.Custody orders can be revised by either the state where the original proceeding occurred or, under some circumstances, by the state where the child resides. A common issue in New York family law cases is the state’s ability to enforce custody orders that were made by another state.

The Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act

Lawmakers understand that situations like the ones discussed above are likely to arise, and as a result, they have developed a uniform act to streamline custody proceedings across state lines. The Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act (UCCJEA) has been adopted by 49 states, including New York, and provides guidelines as to which court has the power to issue binding custody determinations and modifications. It also allows for consistent enforcement of out-of-state custody determinations.

Opening Statements in Child Custody Trials

August 7, 2017 | Law and Mediation Office of Darren M. Shapiro, P.C.

Child custody trials can be very challenging experiences for every individualinvolved. After all, they require the court to consider the best interests of a child when moving forward after a divorce case. An important element to remember is that while many professional techniques are used during a child custody battle, no-one really “wins”. Instead, the best arrangement will be suggested based on the unique needs of the child, and the ability of a parent to provide the healthiest upbringing for that child. It is very much preferred for parents to be able to make agreements as to what the custody and parenting time arrangements for their children will be. Trials build the animosity between the parties and thereby are harmful to the children. That being said, custody hearings and trials happen as people involved in a custody battle sometimes cannot or will not settle.

Opening statements represent the start of a custody trial. Often times custody lawyers choose to waive opening statements as the trier of fact in the case is a judge (there are no jury custody trials in New York), not a jury, and the judge most likely would rather proceed to the testimony rather than hearing opening statements. Opening statements are not evidence so a judge might actually appreciate the first witness being called who can provide evidence by their testimony, rather than hearing the musings of the child custody attorneys. Continue reading ›

Cross Examination in Child Custody Trials and Hearings

July 28, 2017 | Law and Mediation Office of Darren M. Shapiro, P.C.

When it comes to pursuing the best interests of a child in the case of “childcustody” there are many different paths for an individual to choose. For instance, some partners considering divorce who must think about child custody concerns will decide to undergo a professional course of mediation, Mediation allows couples to negotiate over potential outcomes for their child, in a setting that allows each side to have their say, without the emotional hardship of litigation. On the other hand, there’s also a “middle-ground” between mediation and litigation that’s known as collaborative law, where spouses will work alongside divorce attorneys and other experts to make decisions regarding parenting time and visitation rights.

Of course, there will always be some cases in which the only option to truly outline the best interests of the child, will be to take the matter to court. In front of the New York Court, divorce attorneys and child custody lawyers will attempt to present a case that shows their client as being the care-provider who can offer the best future for the child in question. This will help the court to make a decision regarding the “best interests” standard for child custody. To present a case fully, attorneys like Mr. Shapiro will frequently use questioning in the form of direct examination, and cross examination.

The Difference Between Cross Examination and Direct Examination

Direct Examination in Child Custody Trials

July 22, 2017 | Law and Mediation Office of Darren M. Shapiro, P.C.

There are various ways to approach a child custody case. For some parents, thebest solution to negotiating things like parenting time, visitation, and custody, will be to consider an amicable approach featuring settlement negotiations, collaborative law or mediation. Indeed, many couples believe that mediation is a powerful option for cases regarding children, as it allows them to limit their risk of exposing the child to painful memories of their parents fighting or uncomfortable emotional experiences such as being interviewed by an Attorney for the Children, a forensic evaluator or a judge. However, avoiding court battles will not be possible for every case. In some instances, the only way to properly pursue the best interests of a child, will be to take the matter to a New York Family court or Supreme Court, and present it in front of a judge.

Litigation in family law is a complex, and often highly nuanced area. There are numerous skills, methods, and techniques that an attorney can use to sway the opinion of the judge, or potentially assist in outlining crucial points in a specific case. One common element of child custody cases, and indeed many litigation circumstances, is the use of “direct examination”. When properly done, direct examination in a child custody case can be used to demonstrate to the judge, or trier of fact, that a person’s request or plan for parenting time or custody is within the best interests of the child or children involved.

What is Direct Examination?

Divorce Mediation Frequently Asked Questions – FAQS

June 17, 2017 | Law and Mediation Office of Darren M. Shapiro, P.C.

As a divorce lawyer for the regions of Long Island, the surrounding areas and New York, I like to inform my clientsthat I’m capable of offering them a range of solutions when it comes to dissolving a marriage. While some people will find that litigation is their best option (and I do litigate), others will prefer to access the often time, and cost-effective solution of mediation instead. As a trained mediator, I can offer clients a more collaborative experience when it comes to settling divorce issues. I routinely litigate, as well as settle cases under the more traditional system, which is set up as an adversarial system (ie. Plaintiff versus Defendant). I also work as a mediator or a review attorney for those that choose divorce mediation as their process to dissolve their marriage. Here, I’ll address some of the common questions I encounter about divorce mediation.

Question 1: How Can I get My Spouse to Agree to Mediation?

Often, both spouses need to feel comfortable in a mediation setting for this process to work. As such, my clients often ask me how to convince their spouse to take part in mediation as an alternate source of dispute resolution. Often, I find that the best option is to simply approach the topic from an angle that both of you understand. For instance, if you’re concerned about money, you could acknowledge that mediation is often cheaper than litigation. Alternatively, if you want to defend the children from an emotional process, mediation is often a much calmer approach to divorce. Continue reading ›