Don't Let Facebook Wreck Your Case!

 In family law cases, Facebook is the primary platform which usually produces evidence of inappropriate conduct.  Mostly because people can't shut up about their bad antics?

Since Facebook likely isn't going to go away anytime soon, parents should carefully consider what they put on Facebook. Facebook is so pervasive there are even laws and published case law involving the use of social media, particularly Facebook and Yelp. Attorney has seen Judges ream a client due to bad Facebook behavior.  Adults should not even need to be instructed re Facebook, but apparently it has become necessary. Kids have all time high rates of depression in part due to the over use of electronic media, see https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2017/09/has-the-smartphone-destroyed-a-generation/534198/

Facebook and Yelp will fight to the end to allow people to say anything they want.  This is a little concerning because parents may believe that just because they put stuff on Facebook, it means nothing.  This is incorrect. Free speech, arguing, and denigrating others online is par for the course. But when it comes to Family Law-- people seem oblivious to the ramifications. Personally we don't even believe in using Facebook at all.

But in Family Law--- attorney always tells clients---get everything you can on Facebook [against the offending party]  if it's relevant to what's going on, because the court will have to at least look at it to get an idea of that party/or your mindset; however judges don't actually like Facebook that much, because it normally causes problems. Remember that the Jerry Springer show was based on sensationalism and hyped up scenarios--- and Family Law is not far behind. Beware that your past Facebook postings can come back to haunt you.  As an example you can see below, that laws are often related to the use of social media:

A federal appeals court in Miami held that a "judge" needn't necessarily recuse herself from a case being argued by an attorney with whom the judge is merely Facebook "friends."  (The clear implication here would be that the judge is friends with one of the attorneys..)

The commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania held that an unemployment benefits board acted appropriately when it releid in part, on an applicant's Facebook post to determine that the applicant was not entitled to benefits.

A Texas law makes cyberbullying punishable by as much as a year in jail and/or a fine of up to $4,000.

........and even WORSE--- according to Harvard Business review, Facebook makes you feel worse if you use it more!!!!  https://hbr.org/2017/04/a-new-more-rigorous-study-confirms-the-more-you-use-facebook-the-worse-you-feel

Another Win for Client!! Wrongful Moving of Child to Another State

Another WIN for a former pro se client!!!    

Attorney helped pro se client Sean S. after the former girlfriend (mother of child) actually physically took the minor child from California, to another state, despite fact that client had already established jurisdiction (UCCJEA) in California, by having filed the proper documents.

When he attempted to serve her, the mother had already left the state, but we were unsure of it. Later, the mother tried to claim she had established jurisdiction in the other state, which was virtually impossible due to the short time that had elapsed. [the subject of jurisdiction is different for parentage actions vs divorce actions, so do not assume anything and make sure you know the correct law for the case that you have..]

Subsequently, attorney helped client (still pro se) contact the child abduction unit and he went to SHARP to get the correct papers lodged and then served.  It did take almost 2 months, BUT in the end, the mother was served personally in the other state successfully!

We then appeared in Court recently, and requested an Order for the mother to immediately return the child to California,  our Request was granted, Judge issued an order, and a court date right after Labor day 2017 was set. If the mother does not appear, then the abduction unit will contact the proper authorities and ensure return of the child.  
---->UPDATE: Judge ordered that the minor child must remain in California, that California had jurisdiction, and client was given visitation pending full mediation.
--------------------------------------------
If YOU have a parentage case, do not wait around before filing your documents.  Especially if there is a possibility of abduction, or flight from the Country (such as going to Mexico and never coming back)--- you are taking a huge risk by failing to file and serve your documents ASAP.

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

DIVORCE, FACEBOOK, AND WHY YOU COULD BE IN TROUBLE...

Probably unknown to most divorce litigants, just about all savvy family law attorneys understand the ramifications of Facebook as evidence. Posting online to Facebook prior to divorce, during divorce and after the Petition has been filed, can all be used as evidence if it is relevant to the case. 

As was seen in a non divorce case in Massachusetts, where a girl used her cell phone to text and tell her sorta-kinda-boyfriend that he should get back in the car when he was trying to commit suicide, and he did, and he died--this should be a rude awakening for the dummy dum-dums out there, that continue to use their phones, texts and Facebook (just to mention a few)--- during problematic times. The girl was convicted of  wanton and reckless criminal behavior:

Teen girl who texted boyfriend to kill himself guilty of manslaughter

Michelle Carter responsible for beau's suicide, decides court    Kieren McCarthy in San Francisco 16 Jun 2017 at 17:2 (link to The Register article)

..

......The two then spoke by phone, and Roy went through with his plan, dying of carbon monoxide poisoning on July 12, 2014. Carter later texted a friend and told her she was "talking on the phone with him when he killed himself ... I heard him die."

Carter waived her right to a jury trial, meaning that the verdict was delivered by Massachusetts Judge Lawrence Moniz. He found her guilty, calling her actions "wanton and reckless conduct" and noted that she had caused his death "by instructing Mr Roy to get back in the truck" – something that she knew would result in "a high degree of likelihood that substantial harm would result."

The verdict is unusual – since Carter was not physically present when Roy killed himself – and represents a shift in recognition of the impact of modern cellphone technology.....

Even if recording someone in California is illegal (if you don't disclose it to them first)-- if something happens that is extremely bad, it is possible that the recording might be used for some purpose against whoever is charged with some unlawful action. As can be seen in this case above.....

Fact:  in nearly all cases which go to Court, attorneys realize certain things can be admitted over an objection. For example, one might object to a statement by one person which is then told by another person, but the first person (who made the statement) is not in the Courtroom--let's say it's a hearsay objection....In Family law, we do not see as many objections as in criminal and difficult civil litigation.  Nevertheless, those issues can come up, and those objections need to be lodged to preserve the record. Intent is often proven by conversations and actions, therefore any relevant conversation immediately needs to be examined for potential objections if such conversation is key to your case.

The bottom line is that in today's technology-oriented world, voice recognition devices, phones, and all electronic devices are fair game in evidence. Complicated discovery rules are being used and promulgated to address new electronic related issues.  So if you plan to shoot off your mouth these days, better be aware that all of it can and will come back to haunt you-- and especially in criminal cases and divorces.

WHY YOU AREN'T GETTING RESULTS IN YOUR CASE?

Family law litigants are usually stressed out, unhappy, and are not pleased when Judge does not give them what they want, or ignores what they have said...........this is pretty much typical when cases first start for many people.   Family law cases involve huge amounts of emotional upheaval due to the family unit being disrupted, so this is not surprising.

In some cases, resorting to mediation (of the entire case) is used, but mediation of entire case means that neither client is personally represented. Instead, the parties agree and work out whatever it is that needs to be resolved.  The danger in this, is that usually only one attorney facilitates the mediation. 

And since legal advice to one party or the other is not given (because the mediator does not represent either party) the parties are basically just agreeing to do or not do whatever, on their own, unless they have actually hired separate attorneys to advise them.  If the judgment on the case is agreed upon in this fashion, sometimes the parties later realize they made a mistake or error in choosing whatever they chose at that time.  In fact, stipulated judgments on the record where both parties are represented in court, are usually not set aside unless there are some errant circumstances or exceptions.

This means difficulty in setting aside such a judgment, as the California Family Law Code has specific rules for setting aside orders/judgments; there are specific time limits and requirements; in addition the CA Civil Code/or CCP will or may affect it as well. 

Many issues are set to be heard at law/motion calendar (by a Request for Order motion)...there is not much time allotted for these hearings. Therefore, issues which are complicated usually cannot be resolved in such a short time; however, certain steps can be gained to set up the foundation for a winning strategy. Most of family law issues can be broken down into sections and tackled separately ahead of time via careful planning. Attorney herein is often inherits cases from other attorneys who have not made much progress in producing results.  

If you want/need results in your family case, call attorney of this blog at (530) 359 8810.  

Technology Addiction--Teens and Even Adults

If you find your child appears overdependent on technology devices or Internet sites--you are likely correct...........for example-- see link below--very relevant and informative........

........

Technology addiction: high-level definition

“Technology addiction” can be broadly defined as an inability to control one’s technology use due to a dependence developed through emotional, psychological, social, environmental, and biological factors. This means that an individual may have difficulty with impulse control when it comes to technology usage, be it the internet, gaming, texting, smartphones, social media, or otherwise.

The above definition is purposefully broad to align “technology addiction” with the more general definition of addiction as provided by the American Psychological Association(APA). The APA defines addiction as: “a chronic disorder with biological, psychological, social and environmental factors influencing its development and maintenance.”

https://www.comparitech.com/internet-providers/technology-internet-addiction/#Social_media_addiction_defined

((There is more to the test, see link..this is just the first part of test...))

Do you have a technology addiction?

Rate each item on a scale of 1 (“completely disagree”) to 7 (“strongly agree”) and tally up your total score to find out. Be honest!

1. I would feel uncomfortable without constant access to information through my smartphone.
2. I would be annoyed if I could not look information up on my smartphone when I wanted to do so.
3. Being unable to get the news (e.g., happenings, weather, etc.) on my smartphone would make me nervous.
4. I would be annoyed if I could not use my smartphone and/or its capabilities when I wanted to do so.
5. Running out of battery in my smartphone would scare me.
6. If I were to run out of credits or hit my monthly data limit, I would panic.
7. If I did not have a data signal or could not connect to Wi-Fi, then I would constantly check to see if I had a signal or could find a Wi-Fi network.
8. If I could not use my smartphone, I would be afraid of getting stranded somewhere.
9. If I could not check my smartphone for a while, I would feel a desire to check it.

NOTE BY ATTORNEY OF THIS FAMILY LAW  BLOG:

In addition, PARENTS that allow their children to over-engage in various technology-related issues could be partially at fault, since the legal custody of children involves the health/welfare of the child.