Interestingly, this decision and the next three decisions pertain to people doing stupid things in motor vehicles. I haven't handled a DWI case in years, but it's always fun to read cases concerning people who think it's a good idea to get behind the wheel of a car while drunk or wasted. And it never seems to turn out well, does it?
PRIOR RESULTS DO NOT GUARANTEE A SIMILAR OUTCOME
Results tagged “Caselaw Round-Up” from Upstate New York Family Lawyer Blog
Another Anders Brief. What more can I say?
Hey, another custody decision! And it involves language from a custody order that should NEVER be in a custody order. It also involves common sense. You'll see.
Here's a decision from Fulton County. Fulton County does not appear often in these decisions and this one is a garden variety parenting time issue.
I shall share a secret with you. There is one judge who pops up quite regularly in these decisions from the Third Department. If you've been reading the decisions for the past few years, or reading this blog (or both), then you probably already know the handful of judges who seem to appear much more often than all the rest. But, of this handful of judges, there is one who pops up quite often.
In fact, when I see a decision from this particular county, my next step is to look for the name of the judge. And if the judge is this particular judge, the next thing I do is scroll down to the end of the decision to see if the matter was reversed or modified on appeal. And chances are quite good that the matter was reversed or modified on appeal.
So ... if you are practicing before this judge you should always, always, ALWAYS file a Notice of Appeal. ON ANYTHING. Why? Because your chances of winning on appeal are about as close as you can get to flipping a coin. Oh yeah.
And remember: a judge is only as good as his support staff. So ... what the heck is going on here?
Sometimes, mistakes are made. However simple those mistakes are, they may need to be amended in some way. In this case, because the mistake went right to the heart of the matter, the Third Department had no choice but to remit the matter back to the County Court.
Another day, another Anders Brief. Obviously, these things come up quite often. One of the reasons for their frequency is that any decent criminal defense attorney will have a knee-jerk response to his or her client pleading guilty or being convicted of a crime. And that response is the almost immediate filing of a Notice of Appeal - whether or not the client waived his right to appeal, since there are some rights that a person does not waive, no matter what. Filing the Notice of Appeal both protects the client and the attorney. Foremost, it preserves the client's right to appeal. Secondarily, it protects the attorney from being sued for malpractice for failing to file in a situation where the client may have been able to win a reversal or modification on appeal. Many Notices of Appeal will not result in an actual filing of an appeal. And, of those appeals filed, some will have no real merit to them. Thus, an Anders Brief would have to be filed with the Court.
Sometimes, the best thing that a person can do is just grin and bear it, with the understanding that you are waiting for when the time is right to pounce and maul the other person. That is the very essense of litigation in Family Court. Because, if you fail to live by this mantra - and pounce well before you should - you are just asking for trouble. And trouble will surely find you. As it did in this little case.
And here we are with yet more decisions from the Third Department, in September 2013. Yes, ever so slowly, I am gaining on the incredible backlog of cases to try to get up-to-date. I probably won't get there until later this year, even if I am lucky. Still, that allows for a lot of great cases to be analyzed in the process.
Also, please be aware that the Third Department has apparently just modified their website in the last few days. I have spent the last hour or so trying to figure out how to continue to link to the pages of the Court's actual decisions, but I have been unable to figure it out. In any event, I think the links are crucially important because one should be able to go directly to the source material to review it for oneself. As I constantly admonish readers: GO READ THE ACTUAL DECISION!
So, upon going to the website, just plug in the 6-digit case number, #105201 here, and a screen will appear containing a reduced image of the decision, giving you all sorts of options. While I really like the website's upgrade, I do NOT like the inability to directly link to the decisions.
Once more, there were no decisions issued by the Third Department for this particular week. So, once again, off we go to see what sort of voluptuous goodies the Court of Appeals has to offer. And what do we have but ...
Yes, we're already into September 2013, and the Third Department had still not issued a decision. But, I have some red meat for the hometown crowd. Ever wonder what happened when the front page news of Occupy Albany faded from view and into our collective memory? Well, I have the very interesting answer for you, right here. And the more I learn about District Attorney David Soares, the more I really like the guy. He seems much more interested in justice than in quotas. And he is duly jealous of his prerogatives as a District Attorney.
Yes, the Third Department took the entire month of August off in 2013 - at least from publishing decisions. So, once more to the Court of Appeals. This time? How about another sex offender case?
Yup. Yet another week where the Third Department was still on vacation. At least it allows me to plow through the summer of 2013 and move towards dozens more family law decisions on the horizon. So, here is yet another Court of Appeals decision to enjoy. And guess what it is? It's a family law case!
Yes, the Third Department was still on vacation for this week. Of course, that just means looking at yet another Court of Appeals decision. Come on in.
And, once again, there is nothing to report for this week, as the Third Department was on vacation. Which means we have another Court of Appeals decision to look at. This one caught my eye because the subject individual was adjudicated as a dangerous sex offender.
The Third Department was on vacation for this particular week, and no decisions were reported. Yeah, I'm still posting for this particular week nonetheless, if only to note that no decisions were posted. However, since I have this space available - and nothing to report from the Third Department for this specific week, I figured I do something ... different. And that "something different" is to turn to another, higher court and presume to cast judgment upon the judgments which that Court has cast. Time to review the 2015 docket from the Court of Appeals, New York's highest court.
I became addicted to the Third Department's website a long time ago, probably back when I started out in my solo practice in or about early 2003. I confess that I'm not much of a fan of the Court of Appeals' website since I do not feel that it is as interactive and user-friendly as that of the Third Department. But, there can be no doubt that the decisions rendered by the Court of Appeals are far more important and wide-ranging than those of any of the state's four appellate courts.
To one of the most fascist berobed monkeys flinging poo, I ask this: is that all you've got? Jiggery-pokery? JIGGERY-POKERY!? Seriously? Oh, you mean the sort of nonsense in which you've been engaging since the day you first darkened the highest court's doorstep? Well, I say @#$%ery youery, pal. I can't wait for the day you choke to death on your own vomit you overripe piece of @#$%! Preferably during oral arguments. Rat@#$%er.
Now, back to our regularly scheduled programming ...
As we dive into another depraved case, I want you to know that I do not showcase these decisions for their sensationalistic grotesqueries but, rather, because they directly pertain to family law and/or matrimonial law, especially with a focus on children.
Why not end this particular week with another sex offender case? There's not much to this one but if you view enough of these, you begin to get the idea of what these sorts of cases entail.
Welcome back, my friends, to the show that never ends: sex offenders. As I think I've stated many times before, sex offenders are related to family law insofar as so many sex offenders victimize children. Granted, some of these children might be older teenagers, but they are still children. And the sexual victimization of children is something that I am both deeply concerned about and something which I find enormously repugnant. It's pretty damned sad that this sort of thing happens so frequently that I stumble across these cases and say to myself, damn, ANOTHER sex offender case.