Articles Posted in Caselaw Round-Up

Published on:

732 Post 10-17-13 Third Department October.pngNot long ago I analyzed a case very similar to this one, involving a District Attorney’s office that delayed beyond the statutory six months on an indictment. As a result, the indictment was dismissed outright. I remember stating that these sorts of things are quite rare. Well, here we have another instance of such a delay, again resulting in the dismissal of the indictment. So … maybe not as rare as I once thought.
Continue reading →

Published on:

727 Post 10-17-13 Third Department October.pngMost custody battles are pretty innocuous and easily resolved. In fact, the overwhelming majority get resolved on consent with the remainder being tried and the parties accepting the results of the trial. I would imagine that somewhere around 1% of all custody disputes ever actually make it to an appeal.
Continue reading →

Published on:

726 Post 10-17-13 Third Department October.pngSometimes, judges get creative. And that’s not necessarily a bad thing. In fact, I laud judges for being intellectually curious and daring enough to craft and tailor unique orders according to the needs of the children that come before them. However, if that creativity is not supported by the testimony adduced at trial, then the creative order becomes so much form over substance. And that’s no good for anyone.
Continue reading →

Published on:

725 Post 10-17-13 Third Department October.pngThis is such a weird and tortuous case, being that it evolved from the Family Courts of two abutting counties, that I’m going to treat it as a Part 1 and a Part 2. Part 1 begins in Tompkins County Family Court and Part 2 ends in Schuyler County Family Court. Nevertheless, the same judge presides over all matters in each county.

I wouldn’t normally write a blog post this way, but I have a thing for both the alphabetical order of decisions and attributing decisions to specific counties.
Continue reading →

Published on:

724 Post 10-17-13 Third Department October.pngI always enjoy custody cases that involve the UCCJEA, if only because they never fail to make things interesting. I’ve had attorneys make all sorts of asinine arguments using this statute. The main thing you have to remember about the UCCJEA is The Six Month Rule. Basically, if a child has been living in another state, upon the consent of both parents, then the child’s home state is almost always the state he or she has been living in for the last six months. Of course, things are never quite that easy.
Continue reading →