Monday, March 30, 2020

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

  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. 
  2. 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.  
  3. 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 required "mediation."
  But mediation doesn't change people.  


         A judge should not be allowing a defendant who is under Criminal Protective                            Order, with prison history, heavy drug use, unauthorized hiding of kids  (after obtaining an intent to withhold for 3 months?) . ... to have custody of kids that one parent has abused...but that is what we have seen?

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, or do not know how;
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.

Note---if you read the above words in the black box, and take offense to it, please stop reading
now, because attorney would not be able to help you. The reason is, attorney is highly realistic and will not sugar coat facts, particularly where that would end up making the case worse.
         Adults must learn that to be treated as an adult, we need to stand up for ourselves. It's one's own job to do that. IF you cannot do that, it is likely attorney will not be able to MAKE you do it; attorney can only give advice, NOT make anyone take or follow it. In fact failure to stand up for yourself may have contributed to your position currently--but if true, and you are trying to improve, then I salute you for trying. It's a start and it's better than doing nothing!

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.

Examples of bad cases:
The father had apparently used inappropriate sexual conduct with minor female kids, kids taken to SCAN clinic in Sacramento, verifying abuse; father ended up with no contact, case was in the newspaper (all data changed for privacy) Father was forcing kids to watch sex videos with him...

                                   Mother was a drug user but able to outfox drug testing; father installed
hidden camera and was able to gain proof, leading to father obtaining the kids legally.

                                   Mother absconded with minor kids to another state; we hired a P.I. and locator to find location from cell phone data. Court ordered the Mother to return with child;
        in another case, Father hid minor children in Bay Area, changed their appearances. We obtained ex parte order for Father to return kids or be arrested. He returned the kids, Mother took back custody.

                                   Father believed Mother was allowed minor kids to be molested by either boyfriend or other male. Hired P.I. to assess Mother's whereabouts and meetups, determined which males were staying with Mother. Then had uninvolved trusted third party query kids and found out which person was the suspect. After this, the kids admitted it was happening. Mother lost custody.
                                   Father was told by minor children, that the Mother was beating up the older child, a female, age 10. Attorney arranged to meet the Father/new wife and both minor children at the local Mc Donald's, (we did not tell the kids that attorney herein was an attorney) course of conversation, the 10yr old was quite lucid and revealed in fact that the Mother was abusing her and sometimes the younger brother. The sheriff and CPS were contacted; CPS later stated that in this case, the 10yr. old child was very bright and gave specific details about the abuse. The children were both placed with the Father -- and Mother never attempted to gain visitation (not even 5 years later!)

One of the worst things that can happen to unprepared clients is to ignore the fact that if they are not married, and fail to file a paternity action in court, the other party can simply take the kids and leave the city, county or country, without the other parent knowing. Obviously this is kidnapping on a different level--but it is easier to get kids back if there is already a paternity action filed, because usually the District Attorney (which has government ability) can use their authority to expedite the search, since the paternity filing typically asks extensive background questions as to the parents.  And if the parents had told the truth on the initial documents, the police authority and FBI have more data at hand.
                                  Worst case: this was not attorney's case--BUT--a Father married to a former citizen of a European country, had two sons with the wife. The wife later absconded with both children, and although it was known what country they went to initially, it cost so much money that eventually the Father had to give up. He has never found the kids. [It might be when the kids are adults they might locate the Father on their own..]

                                   Non custody case: Mother and Father owned several houses, upon separation they lived in the separate houses; the court in Butte never got the case to trial, despite the so-called "track" program that had a rule that each party must agree to a certain date; so when parties did not agree, the case went back on the "track." Unfortunately, that system was not really how legal cases should get to trial (there are actually rules)--so the Mother did not get to trial until 7 (yes seven) years after the divorce was filed.
 On the stand at trial, attorney herein caught the Father lying about his bankruptcy petition (we had a copy of it)--and that was when the Father's attorney called time out, and offered us a deal giving the Mother a large sum of cash to end the case. It was a glorious day!

#1NOTE: “Case results depend upon a variety of factors unique to each case. Past Case results do not guarantee or predict a similar result.” 

#2NOTE: IF you and/or spouse intend to file bankruptcy and you will be in the divorce at that time, you should FIRST  seek counsel from a bankruptcy attorney, as the timing of the filing can impact the divorce and it may be subject to the automatic stay !!~ Nearly all of the bankruptcy documents are filed online and normally you will need a PACER account to view online data. Attorney has done cases in Eastern District Federal Court+Bankruptcy Court (Sacramento), and  is licensed in the following CA federal courts (Eastern District, Southern District, and Northern District; and the State of Colorado Federal District Court.) Attorney is able to answer most questions re filing bankruptcy (which would likely be in Eastern District Court, Sacramento.)

Monday, March 16, 2020

Attorney Takes the Cases that Most Attorneys turn Down? Find Out Why

In many cases, the clients have bungled the case so badly that several attorneys have tried to help the client but then the client ran out of funding.....OR the case is so laden with problems that no attorney who has a lot of money---would want to work that hard something that difficult?

That's part of the reason attorney herein has learned so much about people and various cases, and about a lot of different factors in different areas of law. Attorney has done family law, animal law, criminal defense cases, civil cases, administrative cases, bankruptcy cases and more. Part of this involves animal law because animal law can crop up in many different areas of law.

This in part explains how attorney can do cross over cases involving two or three types of law and related legal issues. Also because attorney is one to like challenging cases [but not other attorneys that are overly difficult which drives up their own fees]-- attorney is more likely to take a case that is interesting, as opposed to being very easy or simple.

Attorney had not realized early in the game that she 
had observed or tackled far more cases which are 
diverse, different, difficult, and seldom seen. 
Having seen all that, attorney then is able to use a wide variety
 of information and out of the box thinking to devise strategy for various cases. 

Attorney is aware that some people think all attorneys do is to know the law. HA!
Just about anyone can look UP the law?

!  You can know a ton of laws and that does not mean you know how to construct a
 case to win if you have never handled things you know nothing about. 

Call today and find out how an attorney can be sincere,friendly, funny and knowledgeable at the same time. 

Ya that dog is smilin' at YOU! :)

Tuesday, March 10, 2020

NEW DV TRO 2020 Published Case Leaves 4 letter Word Intact+Implies Past Conduct Does Count

This published case involves Domestic Violence Temporary Restraining Orders in Superior Courts--this is not the same as a Criminal protective order under the CA Penal Code.

Criminal protective orders are serious charges which can easily place you in jail, and create bad long lasting consequences.

This is the link to the appealed case for DV TRO not being continued, or  heard:

This is a fairly unusual case because it almost certainly is talking about same sex couple, but no names as can be seen, are shown in this published case.

The decision for this case being published is mainly based on what appears to be several things:

One, just because an act or action took place several months ago, that alone does not decimate its inherent character [in attorney's opinion] such that it would not count based simply on the time of the alleged event, and ostensibly,

Two- There WAS a medical reason also given by the Petitioner;

Three, the court left in [what would be called] patently obscene language that was allegedly used by the Respondent, in the written opinion.

This can only mean [to attorney herein]..that the court is attempting to show the overall character of the person using the profanity, for lack of a better explanation, because seldom if ever do we see judges quote the profanity in published cases....[it may appear in criminal cases, but clearly this was not a criminal case for a protective order]

 AND because this is a domestic violence case, with plausible reasons for the continuance being asked for in the court below, due to medical issues among others, it stands to reason that the appeals court does not want DOMESTIC VIOLENCE cases eliminated inappropriately.

(1) Cases should NOT BE TOSSED OUT simply because of the time that an incident took place necessarily, and--

(2) When reasons are given which appear to be valid or somewhat valid, the court should not be tossing out DV cases [for the reasons the court named]

 Those reasons cited by the Superior court below--- were apparently not good enough- - based upon the DV law, and this case, while a short one in briefing, was published for several reasons, and those reasons are based upon the DV laws as cited in the published case.