C.Chan=Winning Results! AFFORDABLE! 4.7/5 Ratings by Clients Friendly+Affordable!CHICO NEW PH.#530.497-0777

Friday, August 31, 2018

Thank You all for Your Trust!!!

Attorney would like to thank all of the many people  who inquire about possible representation....  , unique fact pattern, or cross over issues, or some other complicated situations in the case (possibly involving breach of fiduciary duty, criminal issues, emergency ex parte, bankruptcy filing or other areas of law...)  usually take time to assess properly...so if I have not been able to answer your inquiry, I apologize !

Image result for pic of trial attorney using exhibit

 I use a computer tracking system that logs calls with times and dates but if no message is left, I usually do not call the number back due to time restraints.
But, for example, if someone referred a case to me, I usually would like to know who that person was so I could thank that person?  and I normally ask clients how they found me (online, friend, etc.) 

I am grateful for the opportunity to provide services to clients, and I seldom go on vacations. The last time I went to the movies was in 1998?  Apparently I am too happy working, especially after a caller told me that some law firm in another county recommended me and I don't know that law firm?  LOL  It really doesn't matter, my job is to provide service to others !


Wednesday, August 22, 2018

What Not to Do in Court or at Hearings and Trial

1. Don't roll your eyes, or make faces or start talking out of turn. If you are on the stand as a witness, answer the question keeping in mind the process your attorney explained to you beforehand. Blurting out harmful things can ruin a case. 
2. Don't  keep referring to your child as “my” son or “my” daughter. It usually takes two to make a child, and possibly one to wreck the child.
3. Do not hide embarrassing or foolish acts that the other side will use against you, whether it's on Facebook, Internet, or spouse's friends know already..tell attorney beforehand, just in case..

4. Don’t bring your entire extended family and ten of your closest friends to your divorce hearing. This is not a circus!  (Circuses are fading since animal activists want no animals to perform, not even in movies or rodeos!)
5. Don’t wear inappropriate clothing such as see-thru blouses, short skirts,nightclub wear, low cut blouse or shirt, sandals or flip flops, Ugg boots, beachwear, dresses that belong at a party, big over the top jewelry, super heavy eye makeup or glitter, neon colors, super spiked party heels, bra straps showing through shirt or tank tops, super ratted hair that makes you look like TV girls, pink, green or blue hair, or rainbow hair (dyed or woven in), ripped jeans,or weirdo outfits that anyone knows is not kosher for courtrooms! Conservative clothing/colors are safe. If in doubt ask your attorney.  It's safer to look like a conservative Mom from the 1950's if need be. Just don't wear the 1950's costume or Judge will think you are on drugs.
  NO, NO, NO!!!!
NO, NO, NO...!!!

6. Do not make up crap that never happened or that you never told your attorney and expect your attorney to defend it?  E.V.E.R. Tell your attorney ahead of time!!
7. Don’t show hostility or open anger at opposing counsel. Ignore him or her; if necessary, write small note to your own attorney if it's a lie you're mad about. Opposing counsel already knows you hate him or her.
8. Don’t have your cell phone "ON". Ever!
9. In a child custody/or visitation issue , don’t keep talking about “your” needs and “your” desires. You will appear overly selfish and controlling. Even if you are selfish and controlling, you don't have to tell others!
10. Don’t tell long stories, or mention long incidents that are not at issue. If you have such a long issue, attorney must know ahead of time to gauge how long trial will take.
11. Preferably, do not wear colors that are known colors for certain gangs in your area. Ask your friends if you do not know what this means. We tend to see this issue in the juvenile courts but not always.
PS-- even if you don't HAVE an attorney, all of these above will apply. If you have some common sense and are not on drugs which are mind altering, and you are not on disability, most people can follow the above advice.
If all else fails, at least read what this guy wrote..it makes sense and it might just bring you down to earth... https://markmanson.net/stupid-things  Attorney herein actually thinks that it would help people in general --if they thought long enough to try it out.  Social media can be damaging to children. That has already been proven.

Sunday, August 19, 2018

Attorney DV TRO Success in Multiple Cases

Not so typical DV TRO cases are not easy to accomplish, mostly because people don't understand
how they can operate. A DV TRO is much more complicated that it appears, despite people filing them inappropriately.

In our cases, we specifically explore opportunities for a DV TRO case when facts have already taken place, and we cannot get rid of what has already happened, BUT we still need to do something to preserve the client's rights. This may sound obvious/easy to do, but it is not.

The law re DV TROs (domestic violence temporary restraining orders) was created basically because mostly women were forced to flee their own homes due to abuse of some type. [Men can be victims as well but it is usually mostly women..]  Since abuse can mean a lot of things, women who have left their own homes for various reasons often are not sure what to do or where they can go. However, under the CA Penal Code, domestic violence is defined as intentionally or recklessly causing or attempting to cause bodily injury, or placing another person in reasonable apprehension of imminent serious bodily injury to himself or herself, or to another.

------>  The Domestic Violence Prevention Act (Family Code Section 6200 et seq)-- which we call the DV TRO for short--- is much different than the definition under the CA Penal Code. In fact, the DV TRO specifically mentions sections of the CA Family Code (such as FC6320, 6203(a), FC6203(b).

The DV TRO data, Domestic Violence Prevention Act, (FC Section 6200 et seq)-- is often used by pro se litigants, sometimes inappropriately. Abuse is NOT limited to actual infliction of physical injury or assault. We have seen the DV TRO used inappropriately in some cases, and in others, the clients have never filed a DV TRO because they were too afraid.

Different Approach Methods for Various Cases in DV TRO by Attorney

A few examples..........
Female was formerly abused by the ex boyfriend while living together in another state.  She required medical attention and charges were filed against the ex.  She moved to CA with her two dogs, the ex attempted to continue harassing her, by filing a civil lawsuit re the dogs. [Attorney does animal law and has wide history of examining animal law cases both state and federal..]

Victim has PTSD from the former domestic violence in the other state; the continued following by the ex, to sue her in state of CA was a pattern of harassment, among other things...We filed a DV TRO for her, it was granted, and the ex did not get any of the dogs. Further, the ex's lawsuit was tossed after victim was advised to file in Federal Court and obtained a stay, and that dog case was then dead in the water. This was not in Butte County, but in Northern CA about 55 miles from Butte.

Female was formerly abused physically by the ex, the ex was not charged, but was arrested. She was too afraid to file a DV TRO.

After female left the ex, a prior situation involving potential molest by a family member v another family member arose....the victim family member was living with the ex. We filed the DV TRO and included the victim family member, to prohibit the ex from getting the victim family member back into his home.
This resulted in a CSD (child services) investigation.which was decided by the court at what is known as VIP, which is not mediation, but a process usually used for agreements in custody. Since judge sent the case there, knowing there was a DV TRO filed, the DV TRO was left in place and continued to at least the end of the investigation.  It is a dicey decision to contact CSD if you do not have certain evidence/facts/witnesses, and normally an attorney should be consulted first, unless situation is outright obvious or evidence will be destroyed, or unless there is an obvious 911 situation. Had this not been done, as stated above, it would have created many loopholes in the domestic divorce case. At least this way the minor child did not have to go to CPS nor back to the ex's home.

Female/minor child arrived in CA on a one way ticket from another state, where female had been the subject of domestic violence by the ex and his family. We filed a DV TRO against the out of state ex, because we realized that if there was nothing to stop him, he would come to CA and take the child.

Under cases which involve various legal filings in two states, the UCCJEA and the states' UCCJEA apply. Usually in those cases, the judges will confer to determine the jurisdiction for the case. Each side may believe their "state" should be used for the case. These scenarios can be a little involved, and it is not the attorneys that ultimately decide the jurisdiction. However, we are hoping in our case that the out of state judge will urge the CA judge to keep our case here. Reason being is that when one party sends the other party to go away with a one way ticket, then ends up filing a divorce and
demands return of the child to the other state, while the female in CA has already been granted a one year DV TRO--- why should the judge in the 2nd state want the female to go back to the abuser in the 2nd state when there is a new DV TRO in the first state (CA)?  We will see what happens in several weeks. The ex did file a "response" to the DV TRO in CA but he did not object otherwise on the record when the one year DV TRO was granted. Plausibly, the one year grant included the temporary custody of the minor child as requested, [even if Judge couldn't make a custody order, since the home state was the other state, not CA.] We assume that returning the child would have to be done by the ex in the other state; so far, Judge in the other state, did not order that the Mother or child be returned to the original state (which is not CA.)

We get various unusual cases that are candidates for DV TRO filing. We expect to handle two more DV TRO cases shortly. Most attorneys breeze over this because they limit the scenarios to certain aspects. In our background of meeting people, we have found that the DV TRO definitely has limits but when abuse is present, and other evidence is there, the DV TRO may be appropriate.

Contact Chico attorney C. Chan today 530.359,8810 if you believe you have a DV TRO case. We would be happy to talk with you about the case. Most affordable attorney rates!

Thursday, August 16, 2018

The Biggest Compliment....

Tina Taylor
a day ago
I spent five years embroiled in a highly contentious divorce in which I lost everything. As well, I was attacked by my ex-husband during that divorce, leaving me disabled and unable to work. My attorney did nothing to address this violence and in fact colluded with the other parties counsel. Judicial misconduct also took place in this case.
Obviously, this has left me in a difficult situation both legally and financially. I've spent the better part of a year searching for legal help with no luck whatsoever......... until I called Ms. Chan. Although she is not able to take my case, do to the county where it took place, she actually talked with me.
Not only did she speak with me for more than a few minutes sharing useful information with me, she did so pleasantly, willingly and for no charge. If that wasn't already more than kind and generous, she phoned me a week later giving me the address of a website that has proved extremely helpful.
Ms. Chan's moral principles and ethics are admirable, refreshing, and deserving of respect! Additionally, I read about Ms. Chan's advocacy for animals in her bio and in my opinion, that earns her extra points as a responsible attorney and a fine human being

Attorney posts this above---because:

(a) it is true
(b) things like this situation are more common than people realize
(c) Lassen County is definitely corrupt

(d) attorney herein has experience in family law, civil cases, criminal defense, bankruptcy, animal law, and probably a little more.....and even if attorney does not know the answer (which happens at  times)-- attorney is always willing to try and find out the answer....
(e) attorney believes that all clients appreciate it when attorney treats them like people, just normal everyday people, with common courtesy

(f) attorney believes that many clients are not treated very well by many attorneys generally
(g)  attorney believes that law school does not prepare attorneys to handle people at all, and that many attorneys simply believe they are too high on the chain, and must talk down to people
(h)  attorney doesn't believe that winning is everything in all cases, but for many of the cases, it is crucial.

 Last but not least, attorney has been involved in animal law cases and related issues, and has what would be considered a very high degree of knowledge in animal law issues, including breed specific legislation, dangerous dogs, personal injuries involving dogs/animals, negligence involving animals, animal control/animals, seizures, illegal seizures, humane society groups, fraud by alleged "humane" non profits [good,bad,sued or fake],  lawsuits involving animal control/animals/owners, replevin or writ of possession, abandonment/fines, rescue animals/groups [bona fide/not] issues of rational basis/health/welfare/safety, improper application of the BCS method used to convict owners, constitutional law published cases on First Amendment involving animals; issues involving service animals, therapy and emotional assist animals, vet negligence, animal abuse (or claimed abuse), penalties for alleged abuse or convictions, and more.   

Monday, August 13, 2018

Google Wants Us to Pay for Ads? As if they Weren't already $$$$$

Google's entire format for businesses changed after they implemented their https deal apparently.....

But since attorney has previously been physically attacked inside a Federal Courthouse [during animal law litigation, go figure..] it is not surprising to find  attorney's site or personal data is the victim of hacking. It has already happened, so it's not really new.  



Wednesday, August 8, 2018

Attorney Online


Attorney guarantees the most affordable fees. If you find a better rate attorney can likely
meet the rate as long as it is not outrageous and the other attorney has at least twenty years
of doing family law. ** Just as one example, in a case that took over a year, the opposing attorney was paid over $12,700 (overbilled, actually..) and attorney herein was paid $2,900. Attorney takes cases for one basic reason, and that is to produce a desired result.

Jun 25, 2018 -  - Butte County Family Law Attorney C. Chan, Esq. 530.359.8810 ... You should consult a qualified attorney to obtain accurate legal information ...

Aug 7, 2017 - Chico Family Law Attorney C. Chan 20+ Years 530.359.8810 .... Many attorneys dislikefamily law in its entirety due to the negativity associated ...

CHICO Family Law Attorney C. Chan, Esq. 530.359.8810: December ...

Dec 3, 2014 - 123 Chico Family Law Attorney 530.359.8810 Affordable  Custody Lawyers - Looking For Divorce/Family Lawyers??.


Aug 16, 2018 - https://affordablefamilylawattorneychico.blogspot.com/ ( Phone is on this link online/references) Attorney C. Chan Â Family Law Attorney, ...

Tuesday, August 7, 2018

Affordable Family Law Attorney+ Reviews C. Chan Chico, Placer, Sacramento

Family Law: What Type of Attorney Do You Really Need?

Attorney Reviews:  https://tinyurl.com/ydg6z52f

Wednesday, August 1, 2018

BEWARE:  WARNING.................


If you have any issue in divorce,  involving a property like a house, which is under water, absolutely do NOT let any officer of the court (Judge, commissioner,etc.) GIVE your house to the other party if you paid big cash down--- unless you don't want the house at all....ever.   Get help fast from a family law attorney who has handled these cases as it appears that some in Butte County don't understand how to handle this.

There is a lot written about reimbursements in CA family law cases, and some very messy litigation in the published cases. Typically, a CA FC2640 reimbursement http://codes.findlaw.com/ca/family-code/fam-sect-2640.html
arises when spouses  to the dissolution have spent their separate property money and then went in/out and out/in and changed things such that it's difficult to say who owned what, when, where, and how?

In some instances, each party claims reimbursement. Also note that reimbursement is not automatic if there are issues involving prior marriage, prior title changes, prior refinancing, or any changes to title, or removing people from title.  Further, evidence of someone writing a check for improvements, for example,  is generally not sufficient at all to prove tracing of payments, especially if the one paying had multiple accounts, commingled accounts, and was married, divorced, remarried, and then divorced again.

When a property is now "under water" meaning little to no equity, but one spouse had paid hard CASH and bought the property with $150,000 cash down---should that property (with no equity) just be given to the OTHER party?

The correct answer is usually NO.
But much of the published cases have divorces where there are other items and property so the Court can try and apportion the division.

Family Code 2640 has a provision (b) which says at the end,.."the amount reimbursed shall be without interest or adjustment for change in monetary values and may not exceed the net value of the property at the time of the division."  

Would that mean --- that anyone who paid cash for an asset in their name alone, where the asset was currently worth less than they paid at divorce trial (think CA 2007-to the rock bottom of real estate sales/foreclosures) --  that this means Judge should just give the asset (a house) away to the other spouse whose name was NEVER even on the house, it was not held in joint tenancy, there was no change to the title ever during the marriage, and the other spouse didn't even work to boot--the one that was GIVEN the house???  HELL NO!!!!!!
There is no way in the world that using the phrase in (b) above should cause one party's traceable asset to simply be GIVEN AWAY to the other person.
Family law specialist attorneys usually know this, however, NOT every commissioner or non family law judge, or even a new Family law judge, would necessarily KNOW this?!!

The division should be close to equal BUT when title was clearly held only in one name and there is no equity,  the person who owned the house should have been given the house (that party could re-finance or use a government program to change the mortgage!!)

A huge error like this where the FC2640 reimbursement was not possible due to no equity--but yet the Judge gave that very property to the spouse---this is an abuse of discretion TOTALLY!!!!

We aren't kidding here--there is an officer -- correction- WAS an Officer of the Court in Butte County at that time, and he  simply gave away the house to the person that wasn't on title and was on disability and couldn't afford to pay for the house anyway?
     And the person who OWNED the house had the separate property simply TAKEN from her?  and given to the other spouse???? This case had distinct grounds for appeal but the client chose NOT to do it. Had it been done, the client would be doing quite well now as the appreciation of the property would have been significant.

Never in a million years should this ever, ever, ever happen. Never. Especially when the documents for trial clearly indicated that such property was a separate property belonging to the spouse that put the cash down.

This is a BIG warning to family law litigants that are pro se-- if you have ANY separate property that has any value, even if under water, get help right away!!