Skip to content

court-lawyers-600wFamily court lawyers have varied responsibilities to fulfill. Their role does not end with just providing legal advice and representing their clients in the court, at times they wear the robes of a counselor, bookkeeper, investigator, negotiator and more. Obtaining divorce for his client is just one of the many responsibilities a divorce lawyer discharges. Before a divorce is granted there are many duties a lawyer has to perform and this includes negotiating with the couple for reconciliation, getting separation agreement ready, filing the papers in the family court and take part in the proceeding to end the marriage.

Finding-A-LawyerThe divorce proceedings do not end with the judge signing the papers. The lawyer’s help is needed even after this to handle ancillary issues. Some of the issues that can be a big concern after acquiring divorcee include child custody, status change, visitation and more. Child custody is a contentious issue that a divorce lawyer has to face soon after the dissolution of marriage order has been passed. The lawyer has to represent their client in this issue by suggesting legal remedies for child support. In most cases, there may not be an agreement on the issue of child custody. Sometimes situations may change like loss of job, remarriage, migration, etc. A modification of child support is necessary during such scenarios.

Visitation is normally linked with child support. Visitation will be denied if the support is not paid. It is also common that the respondent hold on to the support unless the visitation is allowed. Though visitation and child support are two different issues in most cases, they are linked leading to complications. It is the responsibility of the attorney to make their clients understand that these are two different issues that need to be addressed separately. Change in status is attributed to remarriage, minor children turning majors and relocation.
Read Also: Valuable Tips On Hiring A Divorce Lawyer
Contact us


WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court seems split along ideological lines as it considers whether websites that collect and sell personal data can be sued for posting false information if the errors don't cause any specific harm.

The justices heard arguments Monday in a case involving Thomas Robins, a Virginia resident who noticed that an online profile about him compiled by Internet search site was filled with major mistakes.

Robins, who was in his 20s, unemployed and single, found himself described as wealthy, in his 50s, holding a good job, and married with children.

The justices debated whether Robins can sue Spokeo for a technical violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act, even though he could not show the mistakes marred his credit, cost him a job, or even a chance at a date.

Liberal justices seemed to side with Robins' view that being falsely portrayed is enough to show harm. But conservatives insisted the law required Robins to show exactly how he was injured.

The case is being closely watched by Facebook, Twitter and a host of other technology firms concerned about class-action lawsuits that would open them up to billions of dollars of damages for trivial violations of the fair credit law and similar statutes protecting consumer privacy rights. On the other side, consumer protection advocates say such lawsuits are the only way to hold companies accountable for mistakes.

"Seems like a concrete injury to me," Justice Elena Kagan said of the mistakes. "If somebody did it to me, I'd feel harmed."

law2Kagan said that Congress passed the fair credit law in the first place because lawmakers were concerned about people being injured by the dissemination of false information.

"People get these reports and you don't know what they are doing with these reports," she said.

Justice Sonia Sotomayor suggested the false information could have harmed Robins in unexpected ways.

"I will tell you that I know plenty of single people who look at whether someone who's proposed to date is married or not," she said. "So if you're not married and there's a report out there saying you are, that's a potential injury."

Spokeo lawyer Andrew Pincus argued that Robins' claims are too speculative and not the kind of "tangible" injury to economic or property rights that Congress intended when it passed the fair credit law.

The law was designed to keep companies from compiling inaccurate information that could jeopardize a person's ability to get loans or find work. Violators can face damages of $1,000 per violation, but that can climb into the millions in class-action cases.

Justice Antonin Scalia said Congress was not focused on faulty information itself, but on the failure of credit reporting agencies to follow proper procedures in collecting and reporting data.

"In fact, Congress has not identified misinformation as a sueable harm," Scalia said.

law1A lower court ruled that Robins could not sue because the errors were harmless. But a federal appeals court overturned that decision, saying it was enough that Spokeo violated the Fair Credit Reporting Act.

Arguing for Robins, attorney William Consovoy said Congress meant to allow lawsuits for people with a "personal stake" in the publication of inaccurate information.

Chief Justice John Roberts wondered what would happen if a person had an unlisted number and a data company published a phone number that happened to be wrong. Is there still an injury?

Consovoy agreed that would be enough.

But Roberts said the court has historically required an "injury in fact" that seems to be lacking in Robins' case.

Spokeo's website allows subscribers to look up personal information about almost anyone. It has a searchable database of profiles that includes addresses, phone numbers, marital status, age, employment information, education and economic health. But the information is collected from a variety of public sources and the company warns that it sometimes contains inaccuracies.

A decision is expected by the end of June.

2015-11-03 09:08:18 GMT

Prevention-of-Domestic-Violence-Act_1 (1)

Family law plays a great role in protecting a child involved in a domestic abuse custody dispute. It is the responsibility of the court to limit to access to the parent involved in domestic abuse. The state laws are in favor of the child and the interest of the child reigns supreme. There are two types of custody, physical custody that decides where the child resides and legal custody on who takes decisions on the child’s behalf. Physical custody can be classified as shared, partial, primary, supervised and complete. Domestic abuse can influence the court’s decision to take a decision on custody. The court takes into consideration past abuse and continued threats if any before deciding on the custody. End of the day safety of the child is primary.

Domestic-Violence-And-Its-Effects-300x300How does the court define domestic abuse? Whenever the child is exposed to bodily injury, sexual assault, rape, phony imprisonment or threats of injury the state can term it as domestic violence. In accordance to the domestic violence law, a household member can be ex-spouse, the sexual partner of the victim, parent of the victim, relative either through marriage or blood and parent of the victim. Domestic abuse can affect custody dispute in a large way. Domestic violence reports five years back are reviewed by the judges in the case of child custody. Any isolated case does not influence the decision of the judge. In case the danger still exists, then the judge may evaluate the situation, and restrictions of the offending party can be imposed. This is how the law takes its course.

In such cases, the court will order supervised restrictions. This is suggested to protect the child from any further risks. A third person is authorized to be part of visitations. The gathering will happen at an authorized location. The duration of the visitation may vary depending on the vitality of the case. Though, it is the discretion of the judge to remove supervised visitation at any point of time considered suitable. Suppose the abusive parent is able to prove that they are of no risk then the supervised visitation can be canceled. In severe cases, the parental rights can be terminated. This happens in cases of severe domestic abuse or when the threat of domestic abuse looms large on the child.