You Don't Have Rights if You don't Know What They Are?

Not surprisingly, many clients believe what their friends tell them and what they see on TV and Facebook.  Unfortunately, it's best to actually know at least some of the law that governs the type of issue you have. If you had a complicated separate property issue, compounded by numerous transactions that may or may not create further problems, you would likely have no idea how those issues would be handled?

Or if you have a side businesses which adds to your employment income, and you don't want to pay high spousal, well-- you're going to need a plan well in advance!  Unfortunately, a client may just want to agree to shared visitation where one spouse never pays anything but the other spouse then has to pay increased support because there is not any child support offset?  A typical client isn't going to know these things.

Or, if you had a part time business that you owned years before you met your spouse, and then he started siphoning money out of the business without you knowing it, AND creating more credit card debt (without you knowing it) ---- you are going to have some large issues.  OR if you were married over 20 years and now have huge health issues, should you let your ex bifurcate your case?

Maybe your spousal is too high or too low; maybe you don't understand how it's calculated to begin with, so you wouldn't know if it was right to start with?

Maybe you think all attorneys work the same way, but in fact, each attorney handles their clients differently.  Attorney herein has seen showboat attorneys, bragging attorneys, pathetic attorneys, just plain overly aggressive attorneys, and some really lame attorneys that can't or don't have any legal reasons to bring motions forward, and just lose them-- but keep getting paid?  What the hell are they telling their client?  Lies??

Knowing that attorneys act differently, we realize that could mean clients either don't know how attorneys should act, or just assume their attorney is doing things correctly.  Over the years, what is surprising to see in Family law, are attorneys that may have come from a big name school, but can't draft a decent argument for court, much less argue the case. Oftentimes, the documents are hardly persuasive.   Or attorneys that have been around for 20 years and think they own the courtroom, but can't even file a procedurally correct document, or think they can simply bamboozle opposing counsel by using invalid/improper written threats?
None of these things is lost on attorney herein. Attorney carefully sizes up all other attorneys so that we know what we are working with. A strategy plan is always used, even though opposing attorneys usually believe that no plan is being used by attorney of this site... (Haha  that's half the battle there...) How this has happened, is that attorney herein has had to battle other attorneys from both the Bay Area and Los Angeles, and then one realizes that some attorneys are way over the mark.   We know other attorneys never read what we write here and even if they did, it wouldn't matter.  Attorney usually does not lose cases. End of story.

        LOCAL ATTY C. CHAN ROSEVILLE 

       PLACER COUNTY FAMILY LAW~

        916.794-5777

Could Marijuana Use Impact Your Custody of Kids?

Most county employed mediators have standard provisions that parents should adhere from smoking in presence of children, or sometimes even when the kids are under the control of that specific parent. Further, even if smoking is allowed in certain areas, many mediators don't want kids near second hand smoke, period. EVEN if it's inside the house in another room...EVEN if it's anywhere near where the kids might be, play, or access? Like outside?

The "smoking" will generally cover most forms of tobacco and possibly edibles.... (cigar, cigarette, vape, medical MJ, etc...)  And many times, smoking by third parties in the home may not be a good idea due to secondhand smoke. VAPING is almost worst because it is becoming well known, that the nicotine involved, is fused with scents (i.e. cherry,etc) that the teens are running to buy/try?   https://vaping360.com/how-old-to-vape/

In Butte County, a jury has previously returned a guilty verdict over an issue of whether medical marijuana is a defense (to child endangerment charges)--- the long contested case of  Daisy Bram, where allegedly, the lesser count of misdemeanor child endangerment was found (as opposed to child endangerment likely to cause great bodily harm)... Judge Glusman ruled that no valid evidence was presented as to the certified use of medicinal marijuana and thus it was not available as a defense. Ms. Bram was not represented by counsel, which obviously hindered her defense.

http://reason.com/blog/2014/03/07/daisy-bram-a-witness-in-federal-case-aga

Child Endangerment in California...

Under Penal Code section 273a  there is a possibility of criminal prosecution whenever a child is under your care or custody and you:

• Willfully permit the child to suffer;
• Inflict unjustifiable physical or mental pain upon any child; or
• Willfully endanger the health of a child.

If the prosecuting agency in your county believes that you are “endangering the health of your child” by smoking marijuana or growing it in a home where your children reside, you may face criminal charges....

These charges may be filed as a misdemeanor or as a felony. Of course, if the court order stated that any type of smoking or use of same is not allowed while child is under your care, a violation might be a contempt charge potentially, if the other spouse or another was to bring that claim forward?

If convicted of felony child endangerment, you could be sentenced to up to six years in prison and ordered to pay a maximum $10,000 fine. A misdemeanor conviction is punishable by up to one year in county jail, up to a $1,000 fine, or both.

Why is Alcohol Allowed But Not MJ?

Generally, no courts like the idea of alcohol, tobacco, marijuana, edibles, cigarettes, cigars, etc. when it comes to kids. Although there are tons of rules regarding drunk driving, there are not tons of rules for intoxication at home due to getting high on drugs, including legal marijuana and the like. While the hearsay out there is that MJ will be used, consumed and grown by large business, including beer companies, and that the feds will be changing those laws, it is a possibility, but we wouldn't bet your life on it happening super soon. The banks and other super duty corporations always want to benefit themselves first. BUT if they manage to do it, we can be assured that they will have already thought of safer ways to tone down common marijuana so that it would be as common as alcohol, and treated closer to the way alcohol is regulated.  OTOH, the presence of nicotine in the vaping formulas which are targeting teens (and apparently succeeding)-- is something that relies on curiosity and being popular, because "everyone" is trying it. However one is supposed to be 21 to be "vaping"....well, we are sure that plenty of people are ignoring that there law?? LOL
Parents that are smoking or vaping, your kids are watching you.

Note:  //The courts generally do not favor the smoking of MJ, even if it is medically prescribed. People with chronic anxiety often resort to marijuana use, or prescription meds. The meds only do so much, the overly anxious client will still be overly anxious, but somewhat better than with no meds at all.//

Underwater Separate Property at Trial

If a couple has been in a relationship for over 20 years let's say, and substantial assets have been acquired but one party really doesn't know what the other party has done with all of the assets...or, both parties brought assets into the relationship to being with, then due to inheritance, improvements, and new business startups, or new investments acquired and sold or traded, the waters become quite muddied, and resorting out all of the transactions over many years can be very daunting.

Attorney herein used to be in an office in San Diego with a Special Master who was always working on forensic issues. Commonly, a CPA would be used but is not required unless complex tax transactions were seen for many issues. When coupled with non disclosure, these financial issues can generate some very high expenses. Many of the cases in the appeals courts can focus on the tracing of assets and division.

Example of Improper Division with Separate Property [not from Placer County]


Even though not an extremely high stakes case, (not in millions, but at least $100,000)---- attorney has seen one case locally where at the family law trial, which attorney was not involved with (both parties were pro se) ---- the "judge" [a Commissioner, not an actual judge] actually claimed to understand FL Code 2640, [see link below] but failed to generate the order after the trial which would explain how judge implemented his decision.  

    In the decision after trial, judge actually ignored the code, failed to award the one party (who had the 2640 claim) her $100,000 proven cash down payment --and simply gave the other party the wife's separate real property [which was then under water]. and there went the client's $100,000 cash down payment, AND the residence,  because Judge never allowed her the credit to begin with, or if he did, he avoided giving the wife the asset which was her own separate property to begin with? 
(Yes, attorney knows that usually the person with the underwater property should have been given the property with time to make some attempts on refi, etc.....she could have rented out 3 rooms and easily..)


http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=fam&group=02001-03000&file=2640-2641

Although CA case law appears to find that real property with a traceable FL2640 claim will usually go to the one who put down the separately property cash, especially if equity is lower than when acquired, and the community has not really made any headway in lowering the principle, this judge ignored the down payment cash by the one party and seemingly claimed that because there was no equity at trial, then he could just award it to the other party, because he has discretion???

Obviously IF this was true, then any judge could ignore FL2640 (as this judge seems to have done)  and just give away thousands of dollars of cash down payments, even though admittedly fully proven and traceable, and then award both the residence and any equity (even if little or none) to the other party, while ignoring the mandate that the traceable, proven cash that wife put down, SHALL be taken off the top FIRST,  because Judge wanted to exercise discretion (so he claims........)  Rather clearly, we don't think this was even discretionary, since when counsel on later motion queried "What about client's $100,000 proven cash down payment in separate property", Judge replied "That's a good question." Obviously the case was an appeals case that would have generated a better decision. The client had no funds and did not wish to do an appeal, unfortunately.
As can be seen, one needs to have a court reporter at a trial, especially if one has a lot of cash at stake. And hiring an attorney for the trial is a good idea especially when you stand to lose your $100,000 because Judge can't apply the code correctly?

Is Your Problem Listed Below?

Do You Need Help with Any of these Situations Below:   

Attorney has experience in all of these situations and far more

                                 Call attorney today 916.794-5777 or 530.359.8810

 Winning Your Support or Modification Motion 

Motions and hearings; Changing Visitation

Child Support Raised or Lowered

Spousal Support--Temporary, Long Term..They are VERY Different

Modification of Orders

Fixing Improper Orders

Reconsideration (strict time limit and rules)

Set Aside of Errant Orders or Judgments

Mediation Issues and understanding how it works
How to Get Prepared!

Actual abuse issues, Domestic violence

Fake domestic violence, and how to approach

Fake spousal abuse, and what to do

Real spousal abuse, but you never reported it?

Using Facebook-- and how it can harm you

You Fight Online by Texting too much? Could it Come back to Haunt You?

Bragging and Partying Online Posting, Causes Less Time with Kids

Supervised Visitation as a Penalty--- and You are Going Broke

You Never Had Legal Help or an Attorney

Child Support Arrears are very high

You signed a document and never understood what it actually meant

Kicked out of House by Ex who Lied in Court?

Attorneys Telling the Truth, Even if News is Not Good

First, the hallmark of a good lawyer is that he or she will tell a client the truth,

 and not pretend that everything is easy or fast.

 Pointing out the good and bad possibilities will give clients a better idea 

of what they are facing. 

A good lawyer gives clients truthful facts, and sometimes, bad news. WHY?  

Because we deal with reality, not fiction, not stories, not lies.

In divorce cases there may seem to be crummy news... you want 

an attorney that you feel- cares about your situation, who 

genuinely wants to help you, and isn't just there to take your 

hard earned income.  Some of the following may be issues, or may take place:

--There will not necessarily be enough money to 

maintain the same living style you were used to.... 

--Possibly,  the family home will have to be sold. 

In some cases, the parties may have options they don't know about.

--Parent may spend more time, or  less time with the children than before....

--Parents who are either highly anxious, on medication 

or have ongoing mental issues, may feel 

overburdened emotionally and have difficulty

 in coping with changes involving children

--The children may misbehave or exhibit other
 problems, which may take time to solve 

Clients sometimes don't understand how the law 

operates,  and may be surprised or upset to find 

out how it might affect them.
Unfortunately, this

 will likely be somewhat common in many cases
as the issue of having less money and two households
is fairly typical in family law for the

 most part. It won't be all fun and games.
But at least having an attorney that seriously wants
to win your case for you is a good start.