Divorce

Divorce

Tuesday, April 2, 2019

Losing Your Case in Family Law Court??

You may not be alone.



We are noticing that many of the Domestic violence TRO cases, especially if the kids or custody is involved-- are being completely tossed aside, and thrown into mediation.
Mediation is unpredictable if you get what we believe is a bad mediator, and believe us, there is at least one of those there..........you can file a complaint with the court, not saying it would work, but if enough people do it, there might be some changes.  There is definitely a good mediator there also, and we are not sure exactly how cases are assigned.

Domestic violence can either be overlooked, or handled inappropriately by judges, at least in our
experience. Considering that counsel has practiced in larger jurisdictions such as San Diego, Sacramento, etc. it basically means we know that not all mediators are created equal.

It is true that some domestic violence cases are not actually valid. 

 But there are many that are absolutely valid, and if (for example)

 -- you have EVER obtained a criminal protective order, 

be advised that when an order comes out involving CUSTODY-- 

it is required that the Judge state on the order or 

modification--that there

 IS a current Criminal Protective Order  (CPO)!!  

This is the law in California.


WELL-- guess what?  We have seen a case where the Criminal Protective Order was mentioned at least over 100 (yes-- one hundred times) in the case file, and NONE of the orders EVER mentioned that there even WAS a CPO??  Only when attorney herein became involved, did any judge even seem to notice the CPO at all ---this is a travesty of justice, people !!!!

There are different types of CPOs  that can be issued...CPO--Domestic Violence; PC Section 136.2, PC Section 136.2(i)(1), PC Section 273.5(j), PC Section 646.9(k), see Judicial Council form CR-160 for example...Even if the CPO had expired--- we would mention it anyway for the background of the case.

Domestic violence cases can be very tricky and even dangerous legally. There is always new case law being published on the subject, because it tends to overwhelm the case, AND children are often the losers because of bad rulings. Don't let this happen to you. Get legal help ASAP especially if your truth is being smothered by improper rulings!! See family code section 3044, which the court usually hands out prior to mediation.


Saturday, March 30, 2019

Attorney C. Chan = The Fixer of Bad Cases!

Attorney has seen many, many cases that never had to get to the point that they are at--IF at least one client had changed some key methods. But it is to be expected that clients can't always fix their cases since they are wound up in the turmoil... right?

From attorney's outside view....fixing most cases is possible. It may not be fast. But it is likely doable over time. Also attorney finds that clients must sometimes modify their own actions and that of the kids as well. Apparently attorney herein is not alone when realizing that the FIXER name is known even by other attorneys, for example.... attorney just saw this online, and it is exactly the view of attorney herein........ at https://njfamilylaw.foxrothschild.com/2018/10/articles/general-new-jersey-family-law-news-updates/when-you-cant-find-a-better-man-five-tips-to-consider-when-preparing-for-divorce/

  1. Find the right “Fixer”:  The divorce process can be beyond overwhelming for countless reasons.  When searching for a divorce attorney, consider not just looking for someone who is experienced in family law.  Also consider retaining an attorney who you feel comfortable talking to.  Who you can trust.  Who you can confide in and discuss certain aspects of your life and your marriage that you may not ordinarily feel comfortable speaking about with anyone else.  Who is responsive and reliable.  Who can ultimately advocate for you in the way that you believe best serves your interests and those of your children.  Who will listen to you and be mindful of what you are looking to achieve.

 ------------------------------------------

There is no point to keep doing the same mistakes over 
and over and expecting a different result?

Therefore if the thing that needs changing just happens to be under your authority, then that's likely where the change needs to be made.  Judges get tried of hearing the same old stuff every day in court.  Pretty soon they are on auto pilot and send everyone to mediation.  But mediation doesn't change people.  

BE VERY VERY AWARE: MEDIATION IS A PROCESS BUT IT IS NOT NECESSARILY A SOLUTION IN MANY CASES. THERE ARE MANY DIFFICULT SITUATIONS THAT WE HAVE SEEN, WHICH SIMPLY CANNOT BE "MEDIATED" AWAY FOR A RESULT.

Judges should not be allowing defendants who are under Criminal Protective Orders to have custody of kids that they have abused....but that is what we are seeing?



Change cannot take place unless someone or something makes a change--it likely won't happen by itself. So in mediation, judges just read what the mediators have written down. When and if the clients don't follow what they are to do, we see repeated issues over and over and over.  Clearly the parties MUST implement some change somewhere.

So the biggest problems are usually that all of the parties:
1.  Don't want to change their behavior
2.  Don't want to jump through hoops
3.  Don't want to have to do anything that is inconvenient
4.  Don't want anyone telling them what to do.

It's pretty simple that if your other spouse or live in, is a difficult personality, takes meds for behavioral issues, or has been diagnosed with A B or C,  your case will take more work. Not every child should be raised primarily with a parent that has NO parenting skills at all.

But sometimes we have to make the best out of a bad situation. And sometimes that may mean we will be required to jump through a few hoops also. For most parents, this is doable. For some parents that have mental issues/or blocks, they will refuse to do whatever it is.  In those cases, the parent that won't comply will inevitably suffer in the long run. Because it isn't about you so much, as whether your behavior will or will not affect the kid or kids to a large degree.

As an example, a couple with kids  where one parent has serious issues and is not suitable as the
primary parent, will continue to battle the other parent for years in trying to keep his/her domain over the kids.

Obviously this person should not be primary custodial nor should he/she even have the kids overnight--that's when we start to have some really large damage with the kids... and to prevent that from being a vicious circle, someone has to step in.

Minor's counsel is NOT always the answer, and attorney has seen that minor's counsel is often given cases that will not change. Reason being, not all parents should be using "co-parenting".  Attorney has seen some pretty bad cases and co-parenting simply doesn't work well in really bad cases.  If you have that situation, call attorney--she may be able to restructure your case.


Tuesday, March 19, 2019

Child Support-- Do you Need to Increase or Decrease It??


California Child Support Guidelines


After the determination of a parent–child relationship, the next step is to calculate the appropriate    amount of child support. The formula used to calculate the appropriate amount of support is known          as the child support guidelines. California law provides guidelines to courts for setting the child        support payment amount. 
Child Support guidelines are based on each parent’s net disposable monthly income and the amount of time the child is cared for by each parent. For the purpose of deciding child support payment amounts,    the court considers income from all sources, whether or not it is reported or taxed under federal law.      The guidelines came into effect as part of an effort to make the calculation less of a judgment call and more of a mathematical equation.  Examples of circumstances that can affect the calculated child support      amount include a child’s educational expenses, special needs expenses, or travel expenses for a distant parent.
The income can be in the form of money, property or services, and includes:
  • Wages from a job
  • Tips
  • Commissions
  • Bonuses
  • Self-employment earnings
  • Unemployment benefits
  • Disability and workers' compensation
  • Interest
  • Dividends
  • Rental Income
  • Social Security or pensions
  • Any payments or credit due or becoming due, regardless of the source, including lottery and prize winnings
  • Usually, a new spouse's income is not considered in setting support, however, we have seen judges consider      the effect that such income has on the net disposable income; therefore, it's probably worth a shot to mention    it if you are the receiving party, or where the difference in incomes between the two parents is vastly different.
The court determines net disposable income for each parent by considering certain items form his or her income, including:
  • Taxes
  • Ordinary union dues
  • Ordinary retirement contributions
  • Health premiums
  • Child or spousal support actually being paid
  • Costs of raising children from another relationship
The court uses the net disposable income for each parent
 and the percentage of time each parent spends with kids:

child support calculator



Friday, March 8, 2019

Parents, Marijuana Use and Custody in California

Could you lose custody of your children due to smoking marijuana?




Most county employed mediators have standard provisions that parents should adhere from smoking in presence of children, or sometimes even when the kids are under the control of that specific parent. Further, even if smoking is allowed in certain areas, many mediators don't want kids near second hand smoke, period. EVEN if it's inside the house in another room...EVEN if it's anywhere near where the kids might be, play, or access? Like outside?  **Note: in one mediation case, a mediator told a client that because MJ smoking is legal, to drop the issue...quite frankly, the actual smoking or use of the drug (even where legal) is not necessarily proper inside, where kids are, or in cars and other certain places? or where kids have any type of respiratory issue/other ailments? In any event, despite the mediator, it is NOT a good idea for MJ to be used around kids, period. Don't care if it's legal.

The "smoking" will generally cover most forms of tobacco and possibly edibles.... (cigar, cigarette, vape, medical MJ, etc...)  And many times, smoking by third parties in the home may not be a good idea due to secondhand smoke. VAPING is almost worst because it is becoming well known, that the nicotine involved, is fused with scents (i.e. cherry,etc) that the teens are running to buy/try?   https://vaping360.com/how-old-to-vape/

In Butte County, a jury has previously returned a guilty verdict over an issue of whether medical marijuana is a defense (to child endangerment charges)--- the long contested case of  Daisy Bram, where allegedly, the lesser count of misdemeanor child endangerment was found (as opposed to child endangerment likely to cause great bodily harm)... Judge Glusman ruled that no valid evidence was presented as to the certified use of medicinal marijuana and thus it was not available as a defense. Ms. Bram was not represented by counsel, which obviously hindered her defense.

http://reason.com/blog/2014/03/07/daisy-bram-a-witness-in-federal-case-aga

Child Endangerment in California...

Under Penal Code section 273a  there is a possibility of criminal prosecution whenever a child is under your care or custody and you:
  • Willfully permit the child to suffer;
  • Inflict unjustifiable physical or mental pain upon any child; or
  • Willfully endanger the health of a child.
If the prosecuting agency in your county believes that you are “endangering the health of your child” by smoking marijuana or growing it in a home where your children reside, you may face criminal charges....

These charges may be filed as a misdemeanor or as a felony. Of course, if the court order stated that any type of smoking or use of same is not allowed while child is under your care, a violation might be a contempt charge potentially, if the other spouse or another was to bring that claim forward?
If convicted of felony child endangerment, you could be sentenced to up to six years in prison and ordered to pay a maximum $10,000 fine. A misdemeanor conviction is punishable by up to one year in county jail, up to a $1,000 fine, or both.


Why is Alcohol Allowed But Not MJ?


Generally, no courts like the idea of alcohol, tobacco, marijuana, edibles, cigarettes, cigars, etc. when it comes to kids. Although there are tons of rules regarding drunk driving, there are not tons of rules for intoxication at home due to getting high on drugs, including legal marijuana and the like. While the hearsay out there is that MJ will be used, consumed and grown by large business, including beer companies, and that the feds will be changing those laws, it is a possibility, but we wouldn't bet your life on it happening super soon. The banks and other super duty corporations always want to benefit themselves first. BUT if they manage to do it, we can be assured that they will have already thought of safer ways to tone down common marijuana so that it would be as common as alcohol, and treated closer to the way alcohol is regulated.  OTOH, the presence of nicotine in the vaping formulas which are targeting teens (and apparently succeeding)-- is something that relies on curiosity and being popular, because "everyone" is trying it. However one is supposed to be 21 to be "vaping"....well, we are sure that plenty of people are ignoring that there law?? LOL
Parents that are smoking or vaping, your kids are watching you.

Note:  //The courts generally do not favor the smoking of MJ, even if it is medically prescribed. People with chronic anxiety often resort to marijuana use, or prescription meds. The meds only do so much, the overly anxious client will still be overly anxious, but somewhat better than with no meds at all.//

https://buttecountyfamilylawlawyer.blogspot.com/  Another site by attorney C. Chan
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sunday, February 3, 2019

When Courts allow Criminal Informants to Have custody?

Why WOULD a family law court knowingly give a criminal informant (aka snitch) the
minor children? Why would the police be trying to help the informant?  Why would everyone
ignore the other parent, and listen to the informant?  Should judges in family court give criminals the minor children?

If you didn't know before, apparently in this county one can be a snitch and then get treated like he's the greatest guy on earth.  Why?  Because obviously, he has done enough snitching such that the police, the District Attorneys, investigators and even the Judges in family law courts, will GIVE him custody???  and what of the kids? Apparently it doesn't matter if you give minor kids to criminals on purpose. Even if the kids have an attorney appointed to help them (also known as minor's counsel..)
From what we have seen, in informant cases, minor's counsel may not be much help? Or maybe
that's because he or she already knows that an informant will be given preference? Just guessing?

WARNING-- very little is written on family law cases where one parent is or was
a confidential informant.  These cases will nearly always be very difficult, because the
snitch will likely be given preference over the other parent depending on how much
leeway is owed to the snitch.

Bad parent may have:

Huge criminal history, jail, prison, VOP, you name it
Violation of nearly all parental ethics
Allowed to engage in child endangerment, slam into a vehicle 7 times with
  his own vehicle, with other parent/minor kids in it, and may not be charged?

Close to kidnapping, (or actual) and withheld visitation for months on and off
Lying nearly 100% of the time, no matter what subject
Used fraud and failed to properly give notice, but the Intent to Withhold Unit
just allows it, unfettered

Used kids as pawns and secretly grooming kids in bad ways
Was able to LIE to all JUDGES without  with some of them even knowing it????
Always able to get perpetual "intent to withhold" and when they expire, do nothing
   and keep the kids?

 Because both federal and state government allow criminals to work for
them as snitches, much has been written about the practice, and the pitfalls that occur.


  • Not to be outdone, academia has launched proposals for The Confidential Informant Accountability Act. A version of such a bill affecting federal law enforcement agencies is currently working its way through Congress. Its sponsor said the bill stems from a September 2016 report by the Office of the Department of Justice Inspector General about the extent of CI use by the DEA and ATF – with little or no oversight.

RESOURCES FOR USING CONFIDENTIAL INFORMANTS

Police policy and procedures


Thursday, January 24, 2019

Save Money on Setting Child Support?

Most people realize that if they utilize the Dept. of Child Support Services (DCSS), obtaining support
may take awhile, but the Department does not charge the client in order to obtain the support from the paying parent.
In many cases where the paying parent has a job where the employer is a business
that is medium-large, or will clearly issue business checks or direct deposit, there may not be many issues.  However, if there is an employee working for a family owned business, or the worker is self employed on a cash basis, or the worker does odd jobs and doesn't have a checking account or pay taxes, or (just an example) is engaged in illegal sales of whatever (drugs, illegal goods, etc.) then
using the DCSS may not work.


Attorney will routinely see cases where clients go to court for child support, and will pay attorneys to carry out the process. Although some of these clients may do well to utilize attorneys, many cases can actually be handled with DCSS (as it does not cost anything).... Whether a client may be treated better by family law judge using the Dissomaster v the DCSS using the same Dissomaster is debatable. However some clients do not care to go to DCSS support hearings and simply would rather pay their attorney. DCSS essentially has a very wide basis of enforcement and tracking ability throughout the United States. DCSS can routinely work with other states for enforcement. It may take awhile, but it is done. This also applies to potential contempt issues.

If you have questions, feel free to call attorney herein at 530 797-6006. You should leave your name and a return number and attorney will get back with you. There is no charge for this.


Monday, January 21, 2019

Family Violence Appellate Project-- CA DV Survivor and Out of State Abusers


October 30, 2017The appellate court granted  publication request in the case of Hogue v. Hogue, making the decision binding legal precedent in trial courts statewide.


  California victims of domestic cyber abuse will now be able to get restraining orders against out-of-state abusers. The new published appellate opinion is binding statewide legal precedent that can be cited in any CA trial court case where the abuse survivor wants to obtain a restraining order against someone who committed an act of domestic abuse from another state, (i.e. cyber harassment or electronic abuse) as long as the survivor was in California at the time of abuse.


 The universal pervasiveness of social media has made it exponentially easier for ex partners to commit domestic abuse, cyber harassment, and other forms of online predatory behavior across state lines. This new ruling in effect extends the intention of California’s Domestic Violence Prevention Act to include modern electronic communications from out-of-state parties.





Wednesday, January 2, 2019

MJ Law Claiming to Protect Minors from Online Ads?

On Jan. 1, 2019, a new California law introduced by Assemblyman Ed Chau

will go into effect with the aim of closing this loophole for good. AB 3067

 will help protect minors from online advertisements of a product which they

cannot legally consume.



RELATED: Pot deliveries can be made throughout California, regulators say

Basically, AB 3067 adds any cannabis, cannabis product, cannabis business,

or any instrument or paraphernalia that is designed for the smoking or ingestion

 of cannabis to the list of products and services subject to the Privacy Rights for

 California Minors in the Digital World (PRCMDC).

Lisa Buffo, Founder and CEO of Cannabis Marketing Association, says that this

new law mainly clarifies some of the language that was already in effect.

"One significant change is that businesses are not allowed to use depictions or

 images of anyone under 21. Before, businesses were not allowed to use

 depictions or images of minors under 18," Buffo says.

Buffo's organization helps educate cannabis marketers on current and future

 advertising and marketing regulations and connects communications

 professionals within the cannabis industry. Buffo aims to keep people in the

 industry informed and, in doing so, close the education gap between cannabis

 and the consumer.



"There is a large education gap between the industry and the public regarding

cannabis," Buffo says. "Speaking to the media and educating the press about

what your business is doing is one way to reach an audience."

PRCMDC currently prohibits an operator of a website, online service, online or

 mobile app directed to minors from marketing or advertising certain cannabis

and tobacco products.



Operators are also prohibited from knowingly using,

disclosing, or compiling, or allowing a third party to use, disclose, or compile

the personal information of a minor for the purpose of advertising certain products.

AB 3067 expands these current regulations on privacy for minors, making it

harder for advertisers of cannabis and tobacco paraphernalia to reach internet

 and app users under the age of 21.

The law is ultimately designed to protect minors.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blogger:  To be honest, making it "harder" for advertisers to sell weed to minors online
is basically not going to stop kids from the bud.  It doesn't take rocket science or a
professional advertiser to know this, *however* if an ad company doesn't want to break
a law, then that advertiser just has to be aware of the laws involving minors/weed.
In other words, just because depictions of kids smoking weed aren't visible, this will have
little effect overall on the kids that want to smoke weed (no matter what age)...there are
going to be potheads whether it's popular or not. Nothing has really changed that much
since the 70's except now everyone uses the Internet, and people seldom play records or
even own a clock, kids don't want to drive, own a car, or move out from their parent's home.
Maybe it has gotten worse? LOL  The baby went to CPS, felony child endangerment, etc.
https://abc13.com/mom-arrested-after-facebook-video-shows-baby-smoking-pot/3243645/
REALITY:  People apparently are pretty stupid, as evidenced by this case. But at least it
was not worse, had she not put it on FACEBOOK, she probably wouldn't be in jail...
(video shared over a million times; police encouraged people to report 'crimes'...)