Articles Posted in Trials

|

A noncustodial parent is required to pay child support to a custodial parent in New York until a child is 21 years old. In many cases, this means that support continues to be paid while a child is in college.

Basic child support is calculated based on a formula using initially the first $143,000 (as of 2016, this number changes over time) of both parents’ combined income and a discretionary amount or an amount based on the same formula for income that exceeds $143,000.00. For a noncustodial parent of one child, basic support is their pro-rata share of 17% of that $143,000, a “cap” that changes every two years in addition to any amount ordered above that cap as mentioned above. The percentage changes based on the number of children. However, a child can also receive add-on support if his or her parents’ combined income is beyond that cap, after the court looks at what are called “paragraph f” factors. Under Domestic Relations Law 240 1-b(c)(7), the court can award educational expenses, such as college costs, as an add-on to the basic support.

This type of support is not mandatory, however. When deciding whether to make the award, the court may consider the parents’ financial circumstances, their educational backgrounds, the parents’ history of paying for these types of expenses to the child at issue or other children, and the child’s academic qualifications. However, college expenses usually aren’t awarded before ascertaining whether a particular child will actually attend college.

Continue reading ›

|

According to the New York Domestic Relations Law, as part of a matrimonial case, such as for divorce, annulment, separation, or obtaining maintenance or equitable distribution following a foreign divorce judgement, the court may award counsel fees. In New York proceedings it is well established that the Court in domestic relations cases has the discretion to award fees depending on the parties’ circumstances, the merits of each sides positions and the complexities involved in the particular case.  As part of a post nuptial agreement, pre nuptial agreement, separation agreement, or stipulation of settlement of a divorce, often times a provision is included about future payment of the other side’s counsel fees by the party that takes a non meritorious position.  In those situations the court will usually seek to enforce the terms of the parties agreement regarding counsel fee applications.  The balance of this blog is about cases that are not covered by counsel fee clauses.

The underlying purpose and rationale behind many counsel fee awards is to make sure that a “needy” spouse has the ability to defend themselves, or carry out legal actions in court. Through counsel fees, the New York court is able to situate both spouses on an equal economic footing when it comes to using legal help and carrying out court proceedings. What’s more, these fees can help to ensure that during litigation, both spouses have equal leverage. The Supreme Court of New York may deliver an order to either spouse involved in the case, requesting them to directly pay counsel fees to an attorney for the other spouse, so as to enable that spouse’s continued participation in the case.  Courts can consider:  type of services rendered; the actual time used; the professional experience and reputation of the counsel; and the respective financial situation of each side. Continue reading ›

|

Fair Hearing when Challenging “Indicated Findings” by Child Protective Services or the

Administration For Children’s Services (CPS and ACS)

No matter what the reason behind a hearing may be, one thing that all of my clients should have access to is a fair hearing if they want it. The right to a fair trial is fundamental to the rule of law, and it applies to civil and criminal cases alike. The right to a fair trial or hearing requires a fair public hearing within a reasonable time by an impartial tribunal established by the law. This blog will cover exactly how a fair hearing should go when it is for the purpose of challenging an “indicated” finding by Child Protective Services.

So, if the case has proceeded to the scheduling of a hearing, that means a caseworker has investigated the case and made an initial determination that the case was “founded” or “indicated”. This means that they believed there was some credible evidence to believe that the allegations involving child neglect or abuse occurred. It also means that the person that was “indicated” or who the case was “founded” against made a timely request to challenge the finding. An administrative review happened after the timely challenge and the review did not overturn the initial indicated finding. Therefore the fair hearing is now scheduled. Continue reading ›

|

What happens in a divorce when someone fails to make financial disclosure or financial disclosure in

divorces?

Parties to a divorce in New York are entitled to complete financial disclosure by the other side. There are a number of ways for a divorce lawyer to obtain this disclosure. Usually one of the first documents exchanged in a divorce is called a Net Worth Statement. In most instances both the Husband and Wife each fill out their own respective Statement of Net Worth. A Net Worth Statement is essentially an affidavit, sworn to before a notary public that is a disclosure by both the Husband and Wife of their respective financial situations.

The Net Worth Statement consists of: the caption of the case; biological or statistical facts such as date of marriage, children names and ages, addresses, occupations, employers, etc.; monthly or weekly expenses like for housing expenses, food, utilities, insurance, car payments, medical payments, taxes to name a few; income from all sources including employment, investments, social security, disability and other areas; assets including cash, checking accounts, securities (notes, bonds, stocks, options), loans and account receivables, cash surrender value of life insurance, business interests, vehicles, real estate, trusts, retirement assets (pensions, IRAS, 401Ks etc.), contingent interests, household furnishings and jewelry among other items; liabilities like accounts payable, notes payable, installment accounts payable, brokers’ margin accounts, mortgages, taxes, loans on life insurance policies and other liabilities; assets transferred in the past three years; support requirements; counsel fee requirements; accountant and appraisal fee requirements, and other financial data that a court or anyone involved with the case might be interested in. Net Worth Statements are sometimes voluntarily exchanged by the parties through their lawyers (I also like to have both the Husband and Wife exchange them in my mediations) before the necessity of court appearances but are required to be produced at the Preliminary Conference. Continue reading ›

|

Challenging an Indicated Finding by Child Protective Services

If you ever discover yourself within a situation wherein you have been made the subject of a report made to the New York Child Protective Services or Administration of Children’s Services (CPS/ACS), it is important to ensure you know your rights. Although an experienced lawyer can be your first line of attack when challenging an indicated finding, it can be useful to learn as much as possible at the process of dealing with such situations. This information is primarily based on the New York Social Services Law.

First of all, it is worth noting that the subject of a report to ACS/CPS retains the right to avoid cooperating in their investigation. The subject is not required to allow the caseworker into their home, and they are not under any requirement to speak with the caseworker, either. If the subject in question refuses to cooperate in these circumstances, then the protective services do not have the ability to force their way into a home. Instead, caseworkers must approach the Family Court and request a judge to evaluate the situation and decide whether there is sufficient evidence to order that the subject allow child protective services into their home.  Please do not take this entry as advice not to cooperate when Child Protective Service is trying to make an investigation as not cooperating with the investigators might have its own negative consequences.  Also, many, if not most investigations, result in an “unfounded” determination.  The information that one does not have to cooperate without a court order is simply to inform about rights that a lot of people do not know about.  Continue reading ›

|

Comparing Divorce Litigation, Collaborative Law, Mediation and Negotiated Settlements

In the process of a divorce or case involving family law, you will often find that there are many different routes available to you. As a trained mediator, litigator, collaborative law attorney and legal professional, I have had experience with all of these varying paths, and have noted that what may be the ideal course of action for one couple or individual, may not be the right direction for another. Neither mediation, nor collaboration, litigation nor negotiation will be the worst, or best choice in all cases. The choice of which approach to use will depend on a deep consideration of your personal circumstances, your individual preferences, and your legal needs.

Litigation

The first, and perhaps most well-known option for divorces to consider, is that of litigation. Litigation is the term that is used to describe the proceedings that may be initiated by two opposing parties in an effort to defend or enforce a given legal right. Cases can settle at any time before or during a trial, but ultimately litigation will be decided by a court after the argument has been heard and decided by a judge or jury on the issue of grounds only. The process of initiating litigation proceedings is voluntary for the plaintiff, but mandatory for the defendant once selected and served, and the formality of the case typically surrounds a formal process bound by a number of crucial rules. Continue reading ›

|

I wear different hats now in my career since I am a litigator, certified mediator, certified collaborative law attorney and a lawyer negotiator. This blog entry will focus on divorce mediation v. divorce litigation as I do both. Overall, my belief is that the couples that I have worked with in divorce mediation are happier with the process than the people involved in the litigated cases.   I have not given anyone tests to measure their happiness either after the completion of a litigated case or mediation, but this is how I feel.

What makes me say that? It’s the little things and the big things. Most couples that I work with in mediation walk out of the process together. Many of them walk out of each session together. One mediation in particular sticks out in my mind as I saw the couple hug in the parking lot after settling the case and getting in their respective cars. Although the parking lot hugging might be the exception rather than the rule, I don’t think it is such a rare occurrence for mediating couples. And why shouldn’t this be? After all this couple, at one time in their lives, were probably closer together with each other than they were with any other person in the world. Yes, the relationship did not work for whatever reason. They fell out of love, grew apart or something else, but at one time they shared something special. Why shouldn’t they part as friends or at least without bad feelings? Continue reading ›

|

Out of court statements offered for the truth of the matter asserted are hearsay under the evidence rules and are not admissible at a trial or hearing, unless they fall under a hearsay exception. This blog is intended to help give an understanding about the applicability of the hearsay rules that I have run into most often in my practice as a New York City area and Long Island Family Law Lawyer. As a practical matter, what this means, is that generally things that people that are not a part of the case say out of court is not admissible.

One important hearsay exception, which originally was made for abuse and neglect cases, is for children’s statements about abuse or neglect are admissible. This hearsay exception is found in Family Court Act 1046(a)(vi). The statement(s) alone are not enough for a finding of abuse or neglect without being corroborated. Case law has expanded this statutory hearsay exception to apply to custody cases.  To be admissible in a custody case, however, the law requires that these children’s statements about abuse and neglect be corroborated. The statements may be corroborated by other evidence which has a tendency to support the reliability of the statement. Repetition of the statement alone would not constitute corroboration, however pictures and testimony about bruises qualifies. Cobane v. Cobane, 57 A.D. 3d 1320, (3d Dept. 2008). Corroboration is defined broadly but must meet a threshold of reliability.

Party admissions are probably one of the most common hearsay exceptions found in matrimonial and family law cases. Generally this is used when witnesses testify about what they heard or read the other party to the case say out of court. Often times, statements made by the person testifying about what they said out of court are allowed in, particularly when they are about a conversation with the opposite party to the case, although they might not technically qualify as party admissions which is the hearsay exception. Unless the statement is harmful to the party that allegedly said it, usually it would not qualify as an admission. Another reason that statements might be allowed to come in is if they are not “offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted”, but rather to simply show that the statement was made. For example, if someone testifies that she told me “it was raining yesterday” is offered to prove it was raining, then the statement is “offered for the truth of the matter asserted”. If, on the other hand, it is being used to show that the woman was able to speak, in that example it would not be “offered for the truth of the matter asserted.” Continue reading ›

|

Trials and hearings, in New York divorces, can be on the topics of grounds, custody, support and equitable distribution.  While the majority of cases settle prior to trial, many trials are still necessary on some or all of the issues.  Although other hearings are possible, such as on contempt or modifications of orders, the aforementioned are the most common.  All of the issues may be heard together or handled at different times.  For example, if grounds are disputed, a court may schedule a grounds trial right away since if grounds do not exist, then the rest of the divorce is a moot point as it cannot proceed.

Grounds are rarely an issue nowadays since the passage of the No-Fault law in 2010 which merely requires one party to the case to be able to swear that the marriage has been irretrievably broken for at least six months.  However, if a party insists on fault based grounds that are disputed, a trial might be necessary on those grounds if disputed.  As a New York City and Long Island Divorce Lawyer, I found myself in a grounds trial soon after the passage of the No-Fault law since the other side insisted on pursuing fault based grounds.  Another possible grounds trial could be on the issue if a party substantially complied with a separation agreement when divorces are sought based on the grounds that the parties have lived apart pursuant to a legal separation for at least one year.

So, what evidence is admissible at a divorce trial?  For the most part, these rules of evidence apply at most civil trials whether on a divorce, family court matter or otherwise.  In general, all relevant evidence is admissible, unless it should be excluded based on some rule of evidence.  Irrelevant evidence should not be admitted at trial if objected to by the opposing side or the trier of fact (judge).  Evidence that has a reasonable tendency to show or not show the existence of a fact necessary to the decision on a matter is relevant.  If a bit of evidence seems to be from a non-reliable source, usually it would still be deemed admissible, however it might not carry a lot of weight.  What value to give the evidence is for the court to decide.  However, even relevant evidence may be excluded if its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, undue delay or waste of time. Continue reading ›

Contact Information
99 Jericho Turnpike #300-G
Jericho, NY 11753
Phone: (516) 333-6555

ATTORNEY ADVERTISING

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Please do not include any confidential or sensitive information in a contact form, text message, or voicemail. The contact form sends information by non-encrypted email, which is not secure. Submitting a contact form, sending a text message, making a phone call, or leaving a voicemail does not create an attorney-client relationship.

Copyright © 2024, Law Office of Darren M. Shapiro
JUSTIA Law Firm Blog Design