Attorney O’s Midnight Musings: Connecticut Law

Posted By Administrator on February 20, 2010

I receive calls every week from people who want information about child support issues. One such questions is, “If the person who must PAY child support is incarcerated, does the child support order automatically terminate?” No, it does not. In order to terminate (or lower) an existing child support order, the inmate must file a Motion for Modification with the court. The magistrate or judge hearing the motion will consider the inmate’s present income and any substantial assets owned by the inmate when determining the modified support order.

If the inmate was incarcerated for a crime against either the child or the custodial parent, however, the court will NOT reduce the existing child support order.

Category: Child Support | No Comments »
Tags: Child Support, Incarceration, Motion to Modify

Posted By Administrator on February 17, 2010

If you are the custodial parent of your minor children (meaning that they reside with YOU), you are likely to have many questions about financial issues such as child support. For instance:

Are there other ways to enforce my child support order?
What is an income withholding order?
What is a medical support order?
How does my daycare order work?

Fortunately, Connecticut’s Support Enforcement Services publishes a concise but helpful brochure designed to answer these questions and several others. The brochure also lists contact information for the agency.

Download: For Custodial Parent — Answers to Common Questions (available in .pdf format).

[Source: Connecticut Judicial Branch]

Category: Child Support, Divorce | No Comments »
Tags: Child Support, Financial Orders in Connecticut, Support Enforcement Services

Posted By Administrator on February 8, 2010

If you are a party to a divorce in the State of Connecticut and you have minor children, you (and your soon-to-be-ex) are required to participate in Parenting Education Classes. It has come to the attention of the judiciary that some online companies are touting such classes that supposedly fulfill the requirements ordered by Connecticut judges. Beware! More than one of those companies has been issued a “cease and desist” notice from the State because their classes do NOT comply with Connecticut’s requirements.

If you take your chances with an online class, you may be out the cost of the tuition, you won’t be considered “in compliance”, and you’ll have to take the classes again (and pay the fee) for a State-approved course.

For more information, see: Parenting Education Programs

Category: Divorce | No Comments »
Tags: Divorce, Parenting Education Classes

Posted By Administrator on January 26, 2010

In this week’s Connecticut Law Tribune, Attorney Norm Pattis published an article in which he discusses the merits of utilizing group — rather than individual — voir dire when trying to impanel a jury. With the Steven Hayes trial on the minds of lawyers and citizens alike, he presents an interesting perspective.

Read: Cheshire Case Illustrates Jury Picking Problems

Category: Criminal Law | No Comments »
Tags: Jury Selection, Voir Dire

Posted By Administrator on January 25, 2010

In the aftermath of the horrific 2007 home invasion in Cheshire, Connecticut, lawyers in the Steven Hayes trial are picking a jury. With so much media attention and a book about the tragedy already on the shelves, this will not be an easy task.

So far, only one juror has been selected.

An article in today’s Hartford Courant discusses the type of jurors that the defense and prosecution will be seeking. It comes as no surprise that their criteria differs sharply.

Read: Picking The Hayes Jury: Prosecution, Defense Have Different Criteria

[Source: courant.com]

Category: Criminal Law | No Comments »
Tags: Steven Hayes Trial. Petit Home Invasion

Posted By Administrator on January 20, 2010

Couples seeking a divorce have three basic options: litigation (court-based action), mediation and collaborative divorce. In this post, I will discuss the latter. Collaborative divorce is a process whereby the spouses and their collaboratively-trained lawyers work together, often with the assistance of a neutral financial professional and a coach, to reach a fair divorce agreement.

Unlike traditional court-based divorce (litigation), the participants in a collaborative divorce are empowered to make their own decisions rather than to rely on a judge to do so. The divorcing spouses and their collaborative team work together to form an agreement based upon the individual needs and interests of the couple (and their children, if they have any).

The participants sign an agreement stating that they will not litigate the case in court. They agree to share all information required to facilitate the process and don’t hide information from anyone in the process. If one of the participants breaks the agreement and takes the case to court, the collaborative lawyers and other professionals are discharged from the case and will not participate in the litigation.
Collaborative divorce is usually less expensive than traditional divorce for a variety of reasons. First and foremost, because the process takes place outside the courtroom, the spouses do not incur fees for multiple court battles (which often require hours of waiting around in the hallway waiting for your case to be called). When assets need to be properly valued, the participants work with a neutral financial professional (who is also collaboratively trained). By sharing this professional resource, the participants pay a much lower fee and the process is often expedited.

There is an enormous emotional component to every divorce which can often cause one or both of the spouses to feel considerable anxiety. The collaborative approach recognizes this basic human element and factors it in to the process. When needed, a neutral coach works with the couple to help them with the emotional aspects of difficult issues and helps to promote productive communication.
The participants are represented by separate lawyers who are there to advise them about the complicated legal issues. However, unlike traditional divorce, a lawyer is not there to try to convince a judge to give his or her client exactly what that client wants – without regard for the needs and interests of the couple (and their children). The collaborative lawyer’s job is to refocus the participants on their common goals, which include being able to meet future financial needs, to have well-adjusted children, and to be able to move forward with as little disruption and trauma as possible.

Collaborative divorce may not be suitable for all couples. However, a candid discussion with a collaboratively-trained attorney will help you decide if the process is right for you.
For more information, visit Collaborative Divorce Professionals.

Category: Collaborative Divorce, Divorce | No Comments »
Tags: Collaborative Divorce

Posted By Administrator on January 13, 2010

According to information provided by New York Times on Yahoo! Finance:

“Most tax advisers thought that Congress would extend the estate tax before it was due to expire at the end of last year. But while the House did act, the Senate did not. So what few predicted would happen did happen: the tax is gone for one year but set to be revived in 2011 at a higher rate and a lower exemption, unless Congress acts. It’s the first time since 1916 that rich Americans can contemplate dying without one last tax.”

This will be a different year for estate planning than in years past.

Read: A Bizarre Year for the Estate Tax Will Require Extra Planning

[Thanks to North Carolina Estate Planning Blog]

Category: Estate Planning, Probate | No Comments »
Tags: Estate Tax

Posted By Administrator on January 4, 2010

I scoured the internet for interesting posts and articles on the impact of the lack of estate tax in 2010. I present a few of them here for your review:

Lack of Estate Tax in 2010: Now Cheaper to Die?
With Taxes Gone, Will Death Be At A Premium?

[Source: ABC News]

Don’t Die Today – Tomorrow There Will be No Estate Tax

[Source: North Carolina Estate Planning Blog]

Beating the estate tax to death
With estate tax set to end this year, retroactive lawmaking in 2010 is likely

[Source: Market Watch]

Category: Estate Planning, Probate | No Comments »
Tags: Estate Planning, Estate Tax, Probate

Posted By Administrator on December 30, 2009

Divorce can be a difficult and painful experience when it involves disputes over custody and visitaiton over the children. As parents try hard to protect their children, such court battles often cause serious harm to those children.

Parents who are engaged in the divorce process should take a few moments to view the video released by the Connecticut Judicial Branch called “Putting Children First.” The video features Superior Court Judge Elaine Gordon, who handled custody disputes as an attorney and now hears those difficult cases as a judge. Some of the statistics reported in the video may be shocking.

The video is available on DVD by calling the External Affairs Division at 860-757-2270.

Watch: Putting Children First
(This link will take you to the Judicial Branch website. Click on the link for the video and it will open on your computer screen in a media player such as Windows Media Player, which you must have installed on your system).

Category: Custody, Divorce, Visitation | No Comments »
Tags: Connecticut Divorce, Custody, Visitation

Posted By Administrator on December 29, 2009

Effective January 1, 2010, The Honorable Lynda B. Munro, Chief Administrative Judge of the Family Division has issued the following standing order:

All information required on Judicial Branch Superior Court Family and Family Support Magistrate Court forms that constitutes personally identifying information as defined by Connecticut Practice Book section 4-7(a) is deemed by this order to be within the section 4-7(b) exception to redaction requirements as information “…otherwise required by law or ordered by the court.”

The text of Connecticut Practice Book section 4-7, which also becomes effective on January 1, 2010, states:

(a) As used in this section, personal identifying information means an individual’s date of birth, mother’s maiden name, motor vehicle operator’s license number, Social Security number, other government-issued identification number, health insurance identification number, or any financial account number, security code or personal identification number (PIN ). For purposes of this section, a person’s name is specifically excluded from this definition of personal identifying information.

(b) Persons who file documents with the court shall not include personal identifying information, and if any such personal identifying information is present, shall redact it from any documents filed with the court, whether filed in electronic or in paper format, unless otherwise required by law or ordered by the court.

(c) The responsibility for omitting or redacting personal identifying information rests solely with the person filing the document. The court or the clerk of the court need not review any filed document for compliance with this rule.

[Source: Connecticut Judicial Branch website]

Category: General Stuff | No Comments »
Tags: Personally Identifying Information