Perhaps the two most common questions I am asked by people who learn that I am a divorce lawyer are: “What causes most of the divorces I handle?” and “How can I prevent becoming one of your clients?”
One of the delights of attending a bar association meeting is seeing new places.
I feel like a new mom.
Few articles I’ve written have resulted in as much feedback as a June 8, 2011, piece I did on a collaborative case filings in Waukesha County.
Frequently when talking to a client, I feel that I am practicing more psychology than law. In fact, in some cases, it’s a true pleasure when we get to the legal issues involved, as opposed to the emotional ones.
As a family law attorney, I prefer when the courts get it right. It makes it much easier to practice law when there is consistency.
At first blush, a recent Wisconsin Court of Appeals decision doesn’t appear to affect family law cases at all.
Those who regularly practice family law are most likely familiar with the ABA Family Law Section’s “Family Law in Fifty States.”
Some times the lessons from caselaw could not be more obvious.
As a sports fan, it’s frustrating to watch Olympic events that have subjective scoring, such as gymnastics and my favorite, synchronized swimming (is that really a sport?). It is so much easier to determine winners and losers where the results are objective, like in swimming and track and field.
I recently gave the Wisconsin Court of Appeals credit for changing, perhaps intentionally or inadvertently, one of the sillier family law rules in Wisconsin with its decision in Tierney v. Berger, No. 2011AP565.
The law sometimes works in mysterious ways.
Smart Money Magazine recently published an article titled “10 Things Divorce Attorneys Won’t Say.” My response: If there are things divorce lawyers won’t tell their clients, it’s probably because they’re untrue.
The Wisconsin Court of Appeals’ decision in Nehls v. Nehls, No. 2011AP2330 (filed June 13), marked the first family law case recommended for publication by the appellate court since March 6, 2012.
It is bad enough that the Wisconsin Supreme Court is wrong on the public policy regarding the modifiability of child support. Now, thanks to an April decision, the justices not only continue to be wrong about the public policy involved — they also have confused what should be simple law.
Is maintenance still relevant in the 21st Century?
A recent Wisconsin Law Journal article questioned the necessity of the Wisconsin Supreme Court rule allowing citation of certain unpublished cases.
A Connecticut judge recently ordered a divorcing couple to share their Facebook and other online social media passwords.
Listening to oral arguments is generally frustrating for me.
Recently, New York became the sixth and largest state to recognize same-sex marriage. If the current trend continues, more and more states will legalize it.
Family Law
Special grandparent visitation statute; ‘significant triggering event’
Family Law
Child support; modification
One of Gov. Scott Walker’s first accomplishments in office was to sign 2011 Wis. Act 2, adopting the Daubert rule for admission of expert testimony.
There’s an old joke about a husband not wanting to pay his wife any maintenance. The judge, after hearing the evidence, finds she is entitled to support and says, “I’m going to give her $1,000 per month.” The husband responds, “Damn nice of you, judge. I’ll kick in a couple hundred bucks of my own.”
I had a very nice lunch recently with a judge who handles a family court calendar, swapping war stories and such.
