Family Law Lifeline

"Gold digger" by Kanye West

John Steele — Wed, 10 Feb 2010 13:46:30 -0600

This question made me stop what I was doing so I could share this on my blog:

My sister was married for eight years and had three children when she had an affair. The affair resulted in the birth of triplets. (Get ready . . . )

My brother-in-law did not ask for a divorce at the time because their youngest daughter (18 months) was diagnosed with cancer that required long and regular chemo treatments. He did not to make matters more difficult for his children at the time. My sister continued with the affair and to this day is on good terms with this man. He has paternal rights to the children and pays a small amount of child support. My sister, the triplets and the remaining daughter still live in the home with my brother-in-law. My sister and her husband have had no sexual relations since just prior to the birth of the triplets. My sister has only worked two years during the marriage and went to school and received a bachelors degree 4 years ago. If she divorces my brother-in-law will she get alimony?

Wow. If your sister has the audacity to ask for alimony after she was essentially a _______ , lived off of her husband while he paid for her to go to school, kept having an affair for years, and having put that poor husband through all that, give me the number for the husband so I can represent him!

People never cease to amaze me.

_____

I don't know who is worse, the sister who needs to find either birth control or a chastity belt, or the brother who seems to think nothing is wrong with having a you-know-what for a sister. Don't get me wrong, many people are unfaithful, and I am not naive. But usually when someone is so down and dirty, they usually do not ask for money on the way out.

People never cease to amaze me (part 84)

John Steele — Fri, 05 Feb 2010 09:07:10 -0600

Question I received this morning:

27 yrs ago when my boyfriend was 26 he fondled his step daughter. This went on for aprox 5-6 months and he put a end to it. He remained her stepfather until four years ago when his wife died. She was aware of the abuse. He has felt great remorse and guilt over the years and has done everything possible to make it up to her. He has paid her bills, worked on her home and cars, bought her cars, paid for her education, given her a place to live, paid for her vacations ect. Five months ago he said no more and closed the wallet.

She is 40 yrs old, has not held a job for over a year, lives on welfare, and has retail theft convictions. He received a letter yesterday from her attorney that she has suffered great emotional trauma due to his abuse and is seeking a settlement. She has been extorting money out of him for the last 27 yrs. She has lived with him & her mother several times since she was 20. How long does he have to pay for this mistake? Should she not have filed charges years ago and stayed away from him? She would drop her son off at his house to ride go-carts, she would go to his house to cut his hair, borrow his car, hang out with her step-brothers. She threatened him when he shut off the cash flow that "things were going to happen" and if she cant have anything then he cant have anything & then ends the conversation wanting to know if she is still on his life insurance policy.

My Answer:

First, she will have to prove the abuse, which will be hard.

Of course, your boyfriend is a pedophile and on a personal level, I wouldn't mind if she could prove it. The fact you state he is really sorry, as if paying bills for someone makes up for molesting them is disgusting. Its likely that the step-daughter is so screwed up because of what he did.

Either way, I hope you don't have young children around him.
_________

What is wrong with a woman that would rationalize conduct by her boyfriend like that? One of the great things about having started my own firm a while back is that I get to say to people like this, "Get the hell out of my office".

I don't represent scumbags. Everyone is entitled to an attorney. But it doesn't have to be me. Besides there are plenty of jaded, burnt out family lawyers who will represent anyone who can come up with a retainer fee. I think those lawyers are as bad as their clients. I see them all the time, and they are the same lawyers who are always complaining about their work. Gee, might there be a connection? Generally, I like my clients, and my clients like me.

Time for me to get off my high horse and go do some work.

Reading the fine print

John Steele — Sun, 24 Jan 2010 12:27:10 -0600

I received an interesting question the other day that really shows me people do not know what they are doing when they say "I do":

MY HUSBAND LEFT ME TO LIVE WITH ANOTHER WOMEN,7 MONTHS AGO. NOW HE WANTS TO COME BACK. I PUT HIS NAME ON THE TITLE OF MY HOUSE. HOW CAN I KEEP HIM OUT OF HERE. CAN HE COME BACK WHEN HE HAS BEEN LIVING WITH ANOTHER WOMEN.

My Answer: You can't.

This got me to thinking. There are two things that people decide to do that make no sense, statistically speaking:

1. College
This is a useful analogy to Marriage, so bear with me. Going to college is not inherently bad. But going to a crappy community college so that you can graduate with tons of debt and work at Micky D's is not a good plan. Yet because young children are brainwashed that one of the two determinants of success is going to college, 18 year olds all over the country that cannot get into a rigorous institute of higher learning pay for overpriced tuition to bottom tier schools that do not have the reputation to assist in a job search, nor the tools to really teach much to the students. If Ivy League schools are having trouble placing graduates, how do you think Southeast Illinois is going to do? (that is not a real school BTW). Yet despite evidence staring us in the face that they may be getting into something they don't fully understand, and despite seeing friends working in fast food with a degree from Southeast Illinois, people keep signing up. Now on to the second determinant society and parents claim will prove you are a success . . .

2. Marriage

As I have stated in earlier posts, people have no idea of the legally contractual relationship they are getting into when they go to get their marriage license. Standing at city hall, snapping pictures, with family members looking on approvingly, cheerfully making last minute plans as to where to go on the honeymoon and so on. But they should. Ignorance is no excuse in the eyes of the law. That is why you can get a ticket even if you didn't know you were speeding. And why many people have to deal with legally important concepts such as "marital property", "statutory guideline child support", and "order of protection" whether they knew the meaning at the time they got married or not.

Bottom line: Not all people are meant for college. I know that is sacrilegious to our current culture where everyone has to be seen as a winner, and we have to pretend everyone is smart. The truth is the world needs garbage men. And its better for the garbage men and society as a whole if those garbage men don't have to pay half their salary towards student loans from Southeast Illinois for their degree in communications or underwater basket weaving. Likewise, not everyone should get married. Or at least not when they are under 30, and are still learning about themselves and what they want. Getting married at 21 is a good way to practice so you can do it better the second time I guess, but normally people too immature to wait until they are ready for marriage usually also are too immature to know the importance of condoms. Thus, these 'training-wheel marriages' are usually messy, and has helped create screwed up kids by the tens of thousands.

I suppose I am not complaining, given that my practice is based on such poor decisions. Since my advice will never compete with a typical 21 year old's mother or father, I am sure business will continue to boom regardless. For those of you who want to learn what the law says about marriage, look up 755 ILCS 5.

Choosing Poorly (A Post Many Will Not Want to Read)

John Steele — Sun, 10 Jan 2010 10:16:35 -0600

At the end of the movie Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade, the bad guy and Indiana finally arrive at a room holding a bunch of goblets and guarded by an old man. One of the cups was the one Jesus used at the last supper, and anyone who drinks from it will get to live forever. The bad guy picks one, drinks from it, and is immediately turned into a pretty gross corpse. The old man looks at Indiana and says, "He choose poorly".

I get many comments from people beginning their divorce related to how horrible their spouse is and how they are getting screwed over by their spouse. As a divorced man myself, I can understand such feelings. However, let me share some thoughts that may change the way you look at marriage, and more importantly, divorce.

Marriage is like a bet. You are saying to the world (or at least your friends, parents, the state, and maybe your church) that you have found the right person. That you have sat down, analyzed the situation, and have determined the following:

If you have children with this person, he/she will help you in raising the child financially, regardless of their relationship with you.

If you get divorced, and are the custodial parent, you know my spouse will pay at least the state required child support without compliant and on time. They will probably pay you additional money because they love their children so much and they will never hold it over you or ask you to justify where the money is going.

If you are not the custodial parent, you know your ex would never play games with visitation, and will bend over backward to accommodate your need to see the child(ren).

If you and your spouse sign up for debt during our marriage, you know that your spouse will always be responsible and pay whatever they can towards the debt. You know that your spouse will never incur debt unknown to you or without first talking to you about it. If you separate, you know they will pay off at least half of the debt, even if their name is not on the debt (since it was incurred to help the family).

If you and your spouse buy a house together, you know that your spouse will never leave you holding the bag, and will always help pay off the mortgage.

If the marriage does end, you know that your ex spouse is so wonderful, that they will honor each and every promise they made in the marital settlement agreement. If they say they will refinance the mortgage in 1 year, and take your name off the home, you can assume it will happen. If he or she promises to pay off credit card X, you don't have to worry even though you co-signed for it.

If the marriage ends, you know that your ex would never stop respecting my role as a parent for your child(ren), and would never attempt to alienate them from you. You know that your partner would never try to replace your role as parent with the latest love of their life.

(I could go on, but I think I have made my point.)

SO. . .

You make the bet and get married. And then you wait to see how it turns out.

The divorce rate for people under 50 that are not strongly religious, i.e. Mormon, Amish, etc, is in the 75% range. The 50% number is meaningless, since it includes demographics that do not relate to most people reading this.

Continuing my tie in with Indiana Jones, that means that there are 4 cups in the room, and only one will result in a successful marriage. Pick any of the three incorrect cups and you get to see if all the assumptions about the person you married were accurate.

If you bet and lose in Vegas, the dealer takes your chips, not the person's next to you. In other words, YOU are responsible for your bet. You certainly would have taken credit for a successful marriage, thus it is only fair that you take some credit if you 'choose poorly".

The good news is that, unlike the movies, you simple start over, and begin searching for your next spouse (hopefully with a pre-nup this time).

Mortgages and Divorce

John Steele — Sat, 02 Jan 2010 09:58:59 -0600

A frequent question I receive often:

My x was order by the court in my divorce decree to refinance in 90 days to have my name removed from our joint property....or he has to sell with my coroperation....he said he was letting the property foreclose....what can i do to keep this from effecting my credit....my name is on everthing...he has not taken my name of the property as far as taxes, insurance, nothing....what can i do so that i will not be finacially responsible for this debt.

My answer:

In a word: Nothing. Technically, he is liable for loss you incur as a result of not following a valid court order. He agreed to refinance and he is not doing so. In the real world however, he is letting the home go into foreclosure, so he probably doesn't have any money, and you can't get blood from a stone. You chose to enter a mortgage with your spouse and in the mortgage paperwork, I can promise you that it states you are personally liable for the ENTIRE mortgage, even if your spouse never pays. That is why you must always be careful when agreeing to any debt involving a cosigner, or you are guaranteeing a loan for someone else. While this may seem unfair, it is not. If courts could force banks to change an agreement written in good faith because of a divorce, the entire banking system would collapse. Banks wouldn't make loans out of fear of never getting paid, people would scam the system, getting divorces to get out of debt, and so on.

My thoughts on this issue:
The reality is no one wants to face the consequences of their own decisions. When you get a mortgage with someone else (normally a spouse), you are making a bet. You are betting that the other person will do as they promise and help pay the mortgage. If you bet right, you have someone else to help pay the mortgage and you get the benefit of owning a home. If you bet wrong, you have to pay the mortgage by yourself.

On a related note, Marriage is like a mortgage. You are betting that the person you are legally tying yourself to is a good person who will do the right thing regarding raising children, paying bills, honoring agreements, etc, etc. When people bet wrong, they get stuck with problems like paying the mortgage off alone, chasing the person for child support, fighting to see their own kids, etc. (I think I have the subject for my next post!)

Happy New Years!

John Steele — Fri, 01 Jan 2010 12:34:16 -0600

The beginning of the new year seems so full of opportunity and also allows everyone to make their latest 'new years resolutions'. While many will fail (including my resolution to eat better), it is part of our tradition to review, analyze, and attempt to correct our current shortcomings at the turn of the calender.

As I have written before, this time of the year is also one of the busiest for divorce lawyers, as many people's new year makeover do not include their spouse. I have several new clients who literally are waiting until this coming monday to deliver the bad news to their spouse. Many people figure that ending things in the middle of the holiday season is a pain, especially when children are involved.

Last thought: Not all divorces in 2010 need to be messy. The parents who can put their kids before their new boyfriend/girlfriend simply handle things differently then parents who allow personal feelings or anger over the divorce to affect their innocent (and non-blameworthy) children.

John Steele — Tue, 15 Dec 2009 12:27:31 -0600

Here is a question typical of what I get at least once a month:

What is the possibilities to win a 50/50 physical custody in a one year old?

as a non custodial parent ( i am the father) what is the possibilities to win 50/50 physical custody in a one year old ? im from illinois she live 70 miles away from me, im thinking like one week here on one week with here split all the expences is this is possible? we both hold a job and we have a good moral caracter.. thank you for the help

Here is my answer:

Zero. First, Illinois does not do split physical custody (see earlier posts). Here is the reason:

The courts do not like to confuse a kid and not have one stable environment where he can call 'home'. It wouldn't work once he is in school anyway, so your asking for a temporary solution. The courts like to establish stability and upending a child's entire living arrangement in a couple of years is not stable.

You have to think whats in the best interest of the child. Honestly, your request is probably more for your benefit then his. While many non-custodial parents wish to have more time with their child (and some simply wish to avoid paying support), the reality is that the living arrangement a good parent should want for their child is the one in which the child is most likely to become a well adjusted, happy, kid who is successful in school.

Oral agreements are worth the paper their written on

John Steele — Sat, 28 Nov 2009 11:50:15 -0600

I received several inquiries today from people who wanted to know how they go about enforcing an oral agreement. My first option would be to get a time machine. That way the person can go back, grab a lawyer, have him draft an agreement, and get the person to sign it. My second option would be . . . look at it as a learning experience for next time when you should grab a lawyer, have him draft an agreement, and get the person to sign it.

Let's be logical about this (I know that is not common in my line of work). Here is one typical example: I person who you promised to spend the rest of your life with, who discovered you were cheating on them, makes a verbal agreement with you regarding your rights to see your children and how much child support to pay. No need for lawyers because 'they just cost a lot of money". Six months later, when your ex meets the new love of her her life, she suddenly doesn't seem real accommodating, files a petition for child support, and claims you have never paid a dime. Oh, and she cuts off visitation until 'things are worked out in court', maybe in 9 months or so. All that could have been avoided.

This may be counter intuitaive, but your ex will normally be at their most agreeable right before the divorce is final. Both sides want it over, each person needs the other to sign off on the MSA, and each person has this self perception of themselves as reasonable. Also, neither party has usually fallen in love with their new boyfriend or girlfriend, so you have not been relagated to unwanted ex yet.

And don't get me started about child support. The number of men paying cash for child support when there is no agreement in place explains why con artists are so successful: there is a sucker born every minute.

Here are my bulletpoints from this post:

1. GET A LAWYER. You can always make more money, its harder to make more kids.

2. Child support, visitation, custody, and parentage need to always be in writing.

3. Do not put off hard issues for later, put them in writing up front.

4. Do not verbally change a written agreement unless it is VERY minor.

5. Unless you are a family lawyer, do not agree to anything orally or in writing until it is reviewed by and attorney and you understand it.

4. NEVER pay money to someone that you cannot prove you paid that money (I know this is obvious but . . .) And If you pay child support in cash call me because I have a bridge in brooklyn to sell you.

Respecting Illinois judges (part II)

John Steele — Tue, 03 Nov 2009 08:32:50 -0600

6 Months in jail for flipping off the judge. I love these stories, as its about time judges started taking back the courtroom from people who think the ghetto or trailer park they live in somehow extends to the courtroom:

http://cbs2chicago.com/local/mchenry.contempt.court.2.1288146.html

New Parental Notification Law takes effect Nov 3rd

John Steele — Mon, 02 Nov 2009 19:48:50 -0600

For those of you who do not know, starting tomorrow, November 3rd, the law requiring parental notification goes into effect in regards to abortion. Now this is not a post regarding abortion, but rather my thoughts as a family lawyer on the issue of parental notification.

Lets start off by saying that abortion is legal, so for those of you who raise the argument "but it should not be", that argument is irrelevant here. And for those who believe that abortion should be unrestricted, they are missing the point as well. We have long held that common sense restrictions on even fundamental rights, such as free speech is necessary.

There are many instances in which the government, and society, have determined that because something is legal does not mean minors can do it. Remember that minors legally do not possess the maturity to enter into contracts. Society has held since long before the formation of this country that minors should not be held to agreements that they sign because they do not have the knowledge and maturity to make informed decisions. Critics of the new bill claim that somehow such minors do have the maturity to determine whether to end a pregnancy (and depending on your viewpoint, perhaps a life). I would like to make the decision to terminate a pregnancy at least up there with buying a car (which minors cannot do on their own).

Examining the new law, I can't help but think its much to do about nothing as it will not prevent abortions or help parents resume their former role of . . . well parents.

First, the law has the old caveat whereby a minor can simply go to a judge and ask to bypass the notificaiton. There are already free legal aid groups popping up to walk children through the process.

Second, its a parental NOTIFICATION law, not a parental consent law. So unlike most neighboring states, parents do not have to consent to the abortion, just be told by their underage daughter that the daughter is going ahead with the abortion whether the parents like it or not.

Third, (and this is really silly), the notification form, supposedly signed by the parents, required under the new law will be brought in by the children themselves. Gee, think any scared girls will simply forge their parents signature? I'm sure Planned Parenthood will really follow up to confirm the signatures are legit. And why should the underage girl worry? Even if she is caught, she is too young to be prosecuted as an adult, after all she is too young to know what she is doing.

Fourth, why is this particular procedure treated differently than every other medical procedure a child may undergo? A sixteen year old cannot elect to have a kidney operation without parental consent (not just notification). I would bet that abortion has a higher risk of harm to the minor child (I'm referring to the mother) then many medical procedures. Shouldn't the parents, who the legal system say is presumed to have the child's best interest in mind, at least know what their child is up to at Planned Parenthood?

My final thought is that I see parents routinely abdicate their responsibility as parents, leaving it to public schools to teach sex ed, among other values. I see non-custodial parents never spending time with their children, oftentimes because the custodial parent has made it their life's goal of alienating the aforementioned non-custodial parent from their child. Part of all this results from our evolving belief in the role of the state for our children (the subject of a whole other post). It's no longer the parents job to provide health care, its the government. The government will soon provide half of this countries children with food stamps at some point in the child's life. Likewise, parents no longer have the authority to determine when to spank their children without fear of having those children taken away by state employees who are not exactly held to private sector standards of excellence. Google "DCFS abuse" and read about how the state treats Illinois parents.

Until Nov 3rd, Illinois parents are not even allowed to KNOW when their underage child is getting an abortion, never mind having a say in such a momentous decision. We don't hand a fourteen year old car keys just because they think they are ready to drive, and we should similarly keep medical decisions out of their hands as well.

Happy Halloween!

John Steele — Sat, 31 Oct 2009 20:26:33 -0600

Hope everyone has a safe Halloween, and enjoy the kids (if you have any). Halloween is one of those quasi-holidays for parenting time purposes. Parents who fight over such things as having the kids for their own birthday, and minor holidays such as Memorial Day just do not get it. Does your 6 month old really need to ring in the new year? Sheesh. I recently had to remind a client that their one year old won't remember the holidays this year and not to worry about exactly splitting holiday time before a parenting schedule can be drawn up.

The purpose of parenting time is for the children. During negotiations over parenting time, I once had a client respond, "I need them!", referring to her two children. This client, and many other people in her situation, have difficulty with shared parenting because they are thinking of what they want, rather than what their children need. Another example is non-custodial parents who demand to have an equal amount of parenting time with the children. Common sense, and many studies, tell us that children need a stable home environment with one parent and substantial visitation with the other. But kids need ONE home, not two where they split their time. Although there are certainly exceptions to the rule, generally in these situations, the non-custodial parent is being unrealistic. The reality is that NCP's will simply not see their children as much after ending their relationship with the CP. That is one of the reasons why some people stay in relationships with the other parent despite not loving the other parent anymore.

Anyway, back to Halloween. I think this is a good event that parents who are cordial should try to participate with the children together. Its informal, most people don't have family committments (like Christmas or Thanksgiving). And the kids can see their parents working together and being good with each other. Children are very attentive to how their parents interact, and are much less stressed out, and more likely to be better socialized if their parents 'show the way'.

The Judge is Always Right

John Steele — Sat, 10 Oct 2009 20:55:04 -0600

Maybe not, but I promise you won't win the argument!

I just read about an attorney (who shall remain anonymous) who was suspended for one month for his behavior in court. Suffice it to say that despite the increasingly lax atmosphere of Cook County courtrooms, judges still do not like being disrespected. And, as an attorney who focuses on family law, I have had the opportunity to get to see the divorce judges in action enough to know which ones will put up with some attitude and which ones will hold you in contempt quicker than you can apologize.

I recently fired a client who refused to listen to my advice regarding his behavior in court. Why would I do that if that client was paying his bills promptly? Two reasons:

1. Reputation is everything in the legal system. And attorneys and judges know which divorce lawyers will sell their services to the anti-Christ if he paid a retainer. I don't. When an attorney gets up and says "Judge, what happened is X", the judge will be more critical if that same attorney was in the same courtroom the week before claiming some nonsense at the behest of an unreasonable client,

2. Clients who are jerks to the judge will be jerks to their attorney. Its a simple truth borne out from first hand experience (and will be the subject of a future post). And clients who are jerks tend to do other bad behavior, that will cause me as the attorney to have to defend or explain.

Last thought: When I go into the hospital, I know I am out of my element, don't really know what is going on, and I tend to follow directions from the 'experts' (the doctors). Courtrooms for non-attorneys are like hospitals for me.

We Moved!

John Steele — Mon, 28 Sep 2009 20:48:50 -0600

Wanted to drop a post and tell everyone that The Steele Law Firm is moving its downtown office on October 1st to 161 N. Clark St. We will be on the 47th floor in the Chicago Title building. Its very nice and across the street from the Daley center and the Clark/Lake El station. Anyway, the number is still the same. Any mail sent to the old Wacker Drive address will still get to us in case anyone sent something to the old address.

Principle costs Principal

John Steele — Tue, 25 Aug 2009 10:43:40 -0600

It is not cost effective to pay an attorney $250 to fight over $20. Such an obvious truism loses against the rocks of emotion in a divorce. While some attorneys see such silliness as an opportunity to make their mortgage payment early, I thinks its dishonest to promote such behavior. Several random thoughts when people say "It's about the principle":

1. There are many principles out there. Saving money is one of them.

2. Most things are divisible, except children (leaving aside the old testament). Wanting to get the child's first baseball mitt is not about the child or the mitt. And an adult who has a child old enough to have used a baseball mitt should know this.

3. You can always make more money, but you can't make more time. Want to string out the divorce for another 6 months to fight over the IRA? Ok. Bet you would like that six months back down the road when you get diagnosed with a life ending illness.

4. Its not about money, but maturity. Both rich and poor are prone to putting themselves ahead of their children.

5. Unless your partner has recently had brain trauma, he or she is the same person you slept with (with no birth control). In the case of divorce, you promised to be with that person forever. Oftentimes when one party is railing on and on about what a scumbag piece of &^$#* their ex is, the court leans over and says something to the effect of, "he was good enough to marry, but not good enough to see his kid that you choose to have with him?". Or "She was good enough to marry, be the mother of your children, but since she caught you cheating on her, you think she should not have custody of the children now?"

My last point gets to the simple issue of there are no angels in divorce/child custody cases. Just people who make mistakes, and are trying to do what they think is right. There are few principles that one must fight for to the end, and a good attorney will confirm which principles they are. If you find yourself fighting "for the principle of it", "for honor", "because your tired of being pushed around", etc, just keep in mind:

PRINCIPLE COSTS PRINCIPAL

Maintenance

Jason Schneider — Wed, 15 Jul 2009 15:22:09 -0600

The statutory scheme for Family Law is not perfect and there are a lot of things that could be changed or added, but one of the most irksome problem is the maintenance provision. 750 ILCS 5/ is the statutory authority that governs dissolution of marriage proceedings. 750 ILCS 5/504 describes when and under what circumstances an Illinois court will grant maintenance to a spouse. There are very loose guidelines and it basically is left up to the discretion of the judge. The statute states that maintenance can be granted to either spouse temporarily or permanently at the judge’s discretion and then goes on to list several factors that the court will take into consideration including: income and property of each party, the needs of each party, the present and future earning capacity of each party, the standard of living during the marriage, and many more.

Although there are some criteria that will affect the court’s decision, it is ultimately up to the judge and that can be very frustrating to the parties and to their attorneys. You never know which way the judge is going to go and you could end up getting less maintenance than you hoped for as a party or end up giving fifty percent of your salary for maintenance. There is simply no rhyme or reason to it sometimes and a better system would be to set a percentage for maintenance. It would be great if the maintenance statute could be similar to 750 ILCS 5/505 which describes child support guidelines. The Illinois child support statute states that if you have one child you will pay twenty percent of your net income and the percentage goes up for each additional child. Although this system is not ideal in every instance, at least the parties know how much they will be paying or receiving in child support, instead of being left to the mercy of the court in regards to maintenance.

Ultimately, whether or not maintenance will be granted is not always certain and even if it is awarded, you never know how much you will get. The court may grant maintenance for life or just temporary maintenance. This is something that can affect each party’s life significantly and it should not be something discretionary that is reserved for the judge’s opinion on how he/she will interpret the factors in the statute.

- Melissa Fish

Clerk, Steele Law Firm

Home State for Child Custody Purposes

Jason Schneider — Mon, 13 Jul 2009 15:57:58 -0600

Many people do not know what a Home State is, but according to the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act (“UCCJEA”) a child’s Home State is one of the most important factors in a Child Custody case, particularly if the child has moved out of state.

The main reason that knowing a child’s home state is important is because it determines which state court has jurisdiction over any custody disputes that may arise when a child has lived in more than one state. According to 750 ILCS 36/102, the “Home State” is the place where a child has resided: (1) with a parent or (2) with a person acting like a parent for (3) six months or longer immediately before the commencement of a child custody proceeding. If the child is less than six months old, then the place that the child lived from birth with any of the persons mentioned becomes the Home State.

Why does this even matter? Lets say Susan and Mike reside in Texas. They decide to have a baby, and when the baby is three months old, Mike wants to move the family to Illinois. The child lives in Illinois for nine months, until it is one year old. At that time, the relationship between the parents disintegrates, and Susan wants to take the child and move back to Texas, where she grew up, and where all of her family and friends are. For the purpose of determining the child’s home state, the court would find that Illinois has become the new home state of the child, and that the court system in Illinois now has jurisdiction over any custody matters.

To further complicate things, if Illinois courts have jurisdiction, they can very well decide it is not in the best interest of the child to break up the family and allow Susan and the child to move back to Texas, because then Mike would not be able to visit with the child. It is easy to see how things can get messy from there. Furthermore, even if Susan is granted permission to take the child and move back to Texas, the court system in Illinois still retains jurisdiction over the matter, and all proceedings are heard in Illinois. This means Susan has to hire an attorney in Illinois, and possibly incur travel expenses from traveling between the two states.

The lesson learned from this situation is that one should be very careful before making any decisions that involve moving a child out of state, whether you are married, or not married. If you and your significant other reside in the same state and you have a child, and you decide to move, if the relationship ever ends, the situation could turn ugly for you. You may be forced to pay an attorney and attend hearings out of state, or even worse, you may be unable to return to your family and friends without relinquishing custody of your child.

- Jessica Natkin

Divorce and the Internet

Jason Schneider — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 16:05:08 -0600

Social networking sites have hit the mainstream and many of us have made it a daily routine to check and update our Myspace, Facebook, and Twitter profiles. These sites can be a great tool to allow us to stay in touch with friends and family and to keep them up to date on our lives. Social networking sites must be used responsibly though, especially when going through a divorce. Divorce can be an emotional and difficult process and spouses often give in to the temptation of trying to inflict emotional pain on each other and have begun to use the Internet to inflict this pain. Lawyers are now investigating these sites to find evidence and they are finding a gold mine.

Posting nasty comments about the other spouse, the opposing attorney, or the judge is never a good idea. These comments become available for everyone on the web to see. Not only do these comments unnecessarily inflict emotional pain and make the divorce process harder than it has to be, they may carry legal repercussions. Bad mouthing the judge is the quickest way to make an enemy and hurt your chances in court. Putting down your spouse may cast you as a mean or irresponsible person. No judge wants to help the bad guy!

Others have begun showing crazy party pictures with beer bottles scattered around the background (remember that your friends may tag photos of you too). Others post pictures of the new cars or luxurious vacations to the tropics. Hey, living well is the best revenge right? It is, but posting pictures of this new lifestyle will not help your cause. First, you will come off as irresponsible. A judge does not want to give custody to mother who is taking body shots or the father who is downing a beer bong. Secondly, the judge may start to guess if you correctly disclosed your net income, which controls the amount of child support you pay. If you make 30,000 a year and you just posted pictures of your new Ferrari and vacation to Hawaii, you may be in trouble. Once the judge starts to question your honesty, you are in trouble.

Although it may be tempting to vent about your divorce over the Internet, you should avoid giving in. The more private you can keep your divorce, the better. These “web attacks” serve no legitimate purpose and they will not heal the pain you are going through. Often, they will hurt your chances in court and make your lawyer’s job of presenting you as a good person or parent very difficult. They can be especially damaging when pursuing custody of children. Try to keep the amount of comments and pictures to a minimum. When posting, avoid discussing or showing anything that is related to the divorce. In the age of the Internet, it is now your responsibility to present your self as an adult in and out of the court room.

Is DCFS Obsolete?

Jason Schneider — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 16:07:20 -0600

Sometimes a government program can become so over-extended that its purpose becomes lost. I think DCFS may have reached that point in a lot of ways.

This is not to say that is doesn’t exist for a good reason. Clearly the criminal law system is not sufficient to deal with certain cases of domestic abuse or neglect, for instance. Forcing someone to make a choice between sending their spouse to prison and keeping safe either their children or themselves places an additional difficulty on an already difficult decision. DCFS allows for a middle ground, creating protections for adults and children from abuse or neglect but not forcing them to file criminal charges.

But justice delayed is justice denied and no government agency can serve this purpose if they cannot give immediate, thoughtful attention to complaints filed. DCFS has gotten to the point where every report is answered by a blanket statement disallowing the accused from seeing their children or their spouse followed by weeks or months of investigations. On the surface this seems sensible. If the complaint is accurate then isn’t it better to be safe than sorry?

The problem is that this is the real world. People lie and cheat to get whatever they want, and the current system that DCFS employs only encourages it. Let’s say you file for divorce, and you are worried that the judge will give your spouse weekends and Wednesday evenings with your children. Well, you don’t much like your spouse and you don’t think they should get to see your kids (or you want to pressure your spouse into giving you more than what you deserve). You know what you could do? File a report with DCFS and say your spouse hit you. DCFS will immediately issue an order that the accused is not to see their children and you would have sole custody of the kids, aside from a few possible supervised visits by your spouse. This would go on for weeks or months before DCFS found there to be no legitimacy to the claim, and in the meantime you get to punish your spouse and see your kids more.

This is, of course, only if you get a judge who has not already soured on DCFS, and generally ignores their orders when ordering temporary visitation, but this is a whole new problem unto itself. The court needs DCFS because when it comes to the safety of children, in particular, they need an independent source of information. In a divorce emotions run high and both sides will throw accusations at one another. It is the court’s job to comb through all of that to find the facts, but it is not a quick process. The problem with accusations of abuse is that they require a quick resolution and a court does not have proper time or means to investigate and come to a learned conclusion. DCFS, in theory, provides an investigative arm that allows the court to make a more informed decision without much time to compile its own facts. If the judge simply ignores DCFS then they can only use intuition and experience to make these decisions, which are valuable tools, but no substitute for actual facts. To be clear, this is not the judge’s fault. The problem is that DCFS has surrendered so much credibility that it has put courts in the position of having to ignore them and base very important decisions on what amounts to guesswork.

So what is the solution to this? Well, we need to eliminate the incentive to lie to DCFS, thus making their reports more accurate and courts more inclined to listen to the department. First, DCFS needs to be either expanded or streamlined (or both, but as it is the Illinois government I am dealing with I will take what I can get) so that it can meet the needs of filers and the accused without the delays. Current Illinois law allows 60 days for DCFS to compile a report on a child abuse complaint. While many investigations take less time, they still need to be able to respond to complaints more quickly than that. That means DCFS needs flexible employees willing to drop everything to go investigate a claim and having enough free work hours scheduled into every day so they can accomplish this. DCFS needs to reward prompt accurate investigations by its employees, be given enough funding to hire enough workers to accomplish what they need to accomplish, and be given the authority to move workers who are ill suited to the rigors of investigation to a desk in a quiet office.

If investigations are fast (however this is accomplished) and filers are made aware of the speed things will move once a complaint if filed, they will be a lot less likely to lie. It is one thing to lie on a report when you will not have to face an investigator for weeks or months. It is quite another when the investigator will be by the house tomorrow to ask tough questions. While the aim here may be to prevent lying and the filing of false reports, increasing the speed with which everything is done would also be in the best interest of the accuser. If they or their children are being abused, and they can demonstrate this quickly to DCFS, then the department can inform the court and a judge will be given all the necessary information to make an informed, fast and above all safe decision.

Courts need the information that DCFS provides in order to make good decisions as to the safety of children and adults, balanced against the right of every parent to see their children. There are serious problems with the way DCFS goes about its business right now, often leaving judges in the lurch, but many of those problems will be reduced, and potentially eliminated altogether, if the agency can bring itself to investigate claims with speed and aggressiveness that the job warrants.

- Ben Zion

Child Support and the State Disbursement Unit

Jason Schneider — Sat, 04 Jul 2009 16:08:48 -0600

The Court, in Illinois, at the request of either party, will order that the payments either be taken directly out of the non-custodial parent’s paycheck and sent to the State Disbursement Unit; or order that the payments be made directly to the State Disbursement Unit by the non-custodial parent. Sometimes the Court does not order this at all and the non-custodial parent will make the payments directly to the other parent. This usually happens when the non-custodial parent is self-employed, but can happen in other instances as well. THIS IS NEVER A GOOD IDEA. The custodial spouse can then claim that he/she never received the support payments and it becomes a he said/she said match. When the custodial parent files in the court saying that the other parent hasn’t made payments, the custodial parent needs NO PROOF. The burden will shift to the non-custodial parent to show that payments have been made. It is much harder to prove that payments have been made when there is no paper trail. The rule of thumb should be to always pay through the State Disbursement Unit. The SDU keeps records of all payments and if someone says you didn’t pay, all you have to do is get the records and you are home free. It is easy to do and even if the court doesn’t order it directly, you can still contact the SDU yourself and set up the payments.

- Melissa Fish

Happy 4th!

John Steele — Sat, 04 Jul 2009 12:50:57 -0600

Happy 4th!

Holidays like Independence Day where we celebrate the birth of our country (even though our actual Independence Day is July 2, 1776), puts things in perspective. To me, today is a day to enjoy the good things we have earned/fought for/sacrificed for. This applies as easily to our children as our great country.

Some random July 4th shout-outs to some of my clients living right:

For the father who makes daily sacrifices to stay involved in his children's lives. Enjoy today's cookout with them!

For the mom who encourages her children to see their father, despite him being a jerk to her personally, way to put your kids first.

For the mother who never gets a weekend without the kids because the father refuses to see his children, despite living nearby. Your three daughters will remember this years from now.

For the mother who brushed off the threats, and is trying to raise a young child on one income, no child support, while worrying about whether the abusive father will violate the order of protection.

For the father who will not get to see his children because the mother is playing games and not complying with the parenting agreement, as she knows the courts are closed and there is nothing he can do about it until Monday.

Most importantly, for the children, who didn't get a say in their parents, and are stuck for better or worse, with what the parents they were born to. For those lucky to have two great parents, take notes, and pass on those parenting skills to your kids.