I recently read an interesting article about an interfaith couple’s struggle with custody of their daughter. The father, Joseph Reyes, is Christian and the child’s mother, Rebecca is Jewish. The couple is involved in a custody battle that could put Reyes in jail for taking their daughter to church.
Rebecca claims Joseph converted to Judaism and agreed to raise their daughter as a Jew, but Joseph claims his conversion was just ceremonial. When he and Rebecca split, Joseph had their daughter baptized behind Rebecca's back and later e-mailed her photos of the ceremony. Rebecca sought a temporary restraining order to keep Joseph from taking the girl to Mass, but Joseph ignored the order. He has since been charged with a contempt charge and could face jail time. The article cites that the child is being indoctrinated into the Christian faith without her consent. Her attorney wants the father to follow the temporary restraining order.
In California, the right to determine the religion of the child after a divorce is determined by the Legal custody and which parent has it. If it is joint then both parties have the ability to determine and cooperate on the religion.
The article cites that experts on interfaith marriage say a better insurance policy would have been to develop negotiation skills before marriage. Joseph claimed that his wife was never very religious, never kept kosher and did not regularly observe the Sabbath.
The article states when interfaith couples fail to discuss the fundamental differences in their religions, it becomes a big white elephant in the home, but if couples deal with it straight out, they can have very strong marriages.
For some couples a disagreement about religion can be a deal-breaker, but you shouldn’t be afraid to discuss these things with your partner. If you don’t talk about touchy subjects before marriage it can lead to trouble later on.
If you have a child custody dispute please feel free to contact my Santa Clara County Child Custody Law offices. Proudly serving the following cities, Milpitas, Los Gatos, Cupertino, Mountain View, and Santa Clara.
Author's Notes
Tuesday, March 30, 2010
Catch 22 of Same Sex Marriage and Same Sex Divorce
In an article about a same-sex marriage in Pennsylvania the catch 22 of Pennsylvania same sex marriage is that the state does not recognize them for the purposes of divorce. This legal conundrum is happening all across the country as states deal with the issue or states rights but the inevitable of people travelling and moving across state lines.
In this case, the judge would not grant a same-sex couple a divorce because the marriage does not exist in the state of Pennsylvania. The couple can’t get a divorce in the state that recognizes their marriage, because they must be residents of the state for at least one year.
Carole Kern and Robin Taney married in Massachusetts, where same-sex marriage is legal only four months later Kern filed for divorce. While Massachusetts will grant same-sex marriage licenses to couples after a three-day waiting period, the couple must be residents of Massachusetts for at least one year to obtain a divorce. So Kern, a resident of Pennsylvania, filed for divorce in Pennsylvania. But according to the article, Pennsylvania law states, "A marriage between persons of the same sex which was entered into in another state or foreign jurisdiction, even if valid where entered into, shall be void in this Commonwealth.”
In the LGBT friendly Family law offices, we routinely handle with sensitivity and compassion family law for the LGBT community. Should you have any LGBT same sex divorce San Jose, matters please contact my office.
Proudly serving the following cities, Milpitas, Los Gatos, Cupertino, Mountain View, and Santa Clara.
In this case, the judge would not grant a same-sex couple a divorce because the marriage does not exist in the state of Pennsylvania. The couple can’t get a divorce in the state that recognizes their marriage, because they must be residents of the state for at least one year.
Carole Kern and Robin Taney married in Massachusetts, where same-sex marriage is legal only four months later Kern filed for divorce. While Massachusetts will grant same-sex marriage licenses to couples after a three-day waiting period, the couple must be residents of Massachusetts for at least one year to obtain a divorce. So Kern, a resident of Pennsylvania, filed for divorce in Pennsylvania. But according to the article, Pennsylvania law states, "A marriage between persons of the same sex which was entered into in another state or foreign jurisdiction, even if valid where entered into, shall be void in this Commonwealth.”
In the LGBT friendly Family law offices, we routinely handle with sensitivity and compassion family law for the LGBT community. Should you have any LGBT same sex divorce San Jose, matters please contact my office.
Proudly serving the following cities, Milpitas, Los Gatos, Cupertino, Mountain View, and Santa Clara.
Friday, March 26, 2010
New York Child Custody Dispute Results in Kidnapping
I recently read a startling article about a child who went missing during a 2001 custody dispute. Under a shared custody agreement, the little girls’ father, Mike Kibalo, handed his 2-year-old daughter, Samantha, to an officer during a scheduled visitation exchange New York. Kibalo says it was February 4, 2001, the last time he saw Samantha. He and his estranged wife, Ann Yermak, were scheduled to appear the next day in court for a divorce hearing, but she never showed.
A court-appointed psychiatrist had previously testified at a custody hearing that the child’s future visits with her mother should be supervised. And according to the psychiatrist, the mother had been found to show symptoms of Munchausen syndrome by proxy, a condition where a person attributes sickness to someone else, often a child they care for even though the child is not sick. A person with Munchausen syndrome often is motivated by the attention they receive from others for taking care of a child presumed to be sick.
Kibalo says the court planned to award him custody after an investigation by child services ruled the abuse claims against him were unfounded, but Samantha and her mother simply disappeared. It is not unheard of for a court to award custody to the other parent when a parent attempts to file false allegations of child abuse during a custody dispute.
The SUV Yermak had been driving was found two weeks after the disappearance, abandoned in a Brooklyn parking garage. Samantha’s hair and fingerprints were found in the vehicle, but there was nothing to indicate where they might have gone. Investigators learned that in the weeks before she disappeared, Yermak had been loading up on prepaid calling cards and stopped using her cell phone and credit cards. The detective currently assigned to the case says it would be difficult for Yermak to remain on the run with Samantha without help. Two warrants have been issued for Ann Yermak's arrest. A federal warrant is outstanding on charges of unlawful flight to avoid prosecution, and a warrant issued by the Ramapo Justice Court alleges custodial interference in the first degree.
It is understandable that child custody can get heated and emotional. However, there is never an excuse for a child kidnapping. The parent in this case, the mother is a sick individual who needs psychiatric help. She will suffer criminal and civil penalties from her kidnapping. If you have a child custody dispute please feel free to contact my Santa Clara County Child Custody Law offices. Proudly serving the following cities, Milpitas, Los Gatos, Cupertino, Mountain View, and Santa Clara.
A court-appointed psychiatrist had previously testified at a custody hearing that the child’s future visits with her mother should be supervised. And according to the psychiatrist, the mother had been found to show symptoms of Munchausen syndrome by proxy, a condition where a person attributes sickness to someone else, often a child they care for even though the child is not sick. A person with Munchausen syndrome often is motivated by the attention they receive from others for taking care of a child presumed to be sick.
Kibalo says the court planned to award him custody after an investigation by child services ruled the abuse claims against him were unfounded, but Samantha and her mother simply disappeared. It is not unheard of for a court to award custody to the other parent when a parent attempts to file false allegations of child abuse during a custody dispute.
The SUV Yermak had been driving was found two weeks after the disappearance, abandoned in a Brooklyn parking garage. Samantha’s hair and fingerprints were found in the vehicle, but there was nothing to indicate where they might have gone. Investigators learned that in the weeks before she disappeared, Yermak had been loading up on prepaid calling cards and stopped using her cell phone and credit cards. The detective currently assigned to the case says it would be difficult for Yermak to remain on the run with Samantha without help. Two warrants have been issued for Ann Yermak's arrest. A federal warrant is outstanding on charges of unlawful flight to avoid prosecution, and a warrant issued by the Ramapo Justice Court alleges custodial interference in the first degree.
It is understandable that child custody can get heated and emotional. However, there is never an excuse for a child kidnapping. The parent in this case, the mother is a sick individual who needs psychiatric help. She will suffer criminal and civil penalties from her kidnapping. If you have a child custody dispute please feel free to contact my Santa Clara County Child Custody Law offices. Proudly serving the following cities, Milpitas, Los Gatos, Cupertino, Mountain View, and Santa Clara.
Thursday, March 25, 2010
Families on the Brink of Divorce Waiting out Downturn
I read an interesting article today about estranged couples waiting out the bad economy to pursue a divorce. Housing values are depressed, jobs are becoming increasingly hard to attain and now divorce has become a luxury beyond reach for some couples. Often, there is not enough money to survive in separate households, hire lawyers, fight over children and go to court. According to the article, a growing number of couples are deciding to wait out the poor economy while others take different measures, such as living together while they separate. The national rate of failed marriages has declined slightly, but not necessarily because couples desiring a divorce are happier than before. Some experts suggest it’s because they don't have the money.
Dividing into two households can be a difficult task, especially when the same income being used to cover an extra housing payment, extra utility bills, and separate groceries. In an economy such as this, where many people’s homes are worth less than what they purchased them for several years ago it’s hard to make things work or even consider divorce if a home has no equity to draw from to pay for everyday expenses.
The article cites that working-class couples, who already have high rates of divorce, are especially vulnerable to a recession-related breakup because they are hit harder by unemployment, which is a significant predictor of divorce.
The article further cites to research that shows that during hte great depression, divorce rates fell amide hte worst of the economic crisis only to rise as the country recovered. The article further states that the recession created a backlog of divorces waiting to happen but that couples can not afford it currently.
In times of tough economic times, there are attorneys out there who are affordable and can work with your budget. I offer affordable San Jose Family Law services in my Milpitas Divorce Lawyer office. Proudly serving Santa Clara, Milpitas, Cupertino, and Mountain View.
Dividing into two households can be a difficult task, especially when the same income being used to cover an extra housing payment, extra utility bills, and separate groceries. In an economy such as this, where many people’s homes are worth less than what they purchased them for several years ago it’s hard to make things work or even consider divorce if a home has no equity to draw from to pay for everyday expenses.
The article cites that working-class couples, who already have high rates of divorce, are especially vulnerable to a recession-related breakup because they are hit harder by unemployment, which is a significant predictor of divorce.
The article further cites to research that shows that during hte great depression, divorce rates fell amide hte worst of the economic crisis only to rise as the country recovered. The article further states that the recession created a backlog of divorces waiting to happen but that couples can not afford it currently.
In times of tough economic times, there are attorneys out there who are affordable and can work with your budget. I offer affordable San Jose Family Law services in my Milpitas Divorce Lawyer office. Proudly serving Santa Clara, Milpitas, Cupertino, and Mountain View.
Wednesday, March 17, 2010
Should Couples Wait Longer Before Filing for Divorce
I recently read an interesting article about an Arizona marriage bill that extends the time one must wait before a divorce. Under current Arizona law, a married couple must wait at least two months after filing for divorce to have a divorce decree granted. A Republican by the name of Nancy Barto is sponsoring a bill that would increase the amount of time a couple must wait to six months. Barto’s three main reasons for extending the amount of time a couple must wait are:
1) It doesn't allow married couples to make a spur-of-the-moment decision to divorce. Barto hopes that couples will reconsider their options and whether or not divorce is an answer to the problems they are facing.
2) It is expensive to get divorced -- not just for those involved, but for the state as well.
3) The effect divorce can have on the children involved.
Response to the bill has been mixed and many wonder whether extending the period of time will really make a difference or not and there are already options out there for saving money during divorce proceedings. The example given in the article is the “flat-fee divorce” which allows couples to pay a single attorney fee for services rendered in divorce proceedings.
In California it is already the law that a party must wait 6 months and one day from the date of filing for divorce for a decree of divorce to be finalized.
If you have further questions about California Divorce Law, please contact my Sunnyvale Family Lawyer Office, we proudly serve San Jose, Santa Clara, Milpitas, Cupertino, and Los Gatos.
1) It doesn't allow married couples to make a spur-of-the-moment decision to divorce. Barto hopes that couples will reconsider their options and whether or not divorce is an answer to the problems they are facing.
2) It is expensive to get divorced -- not just for those involved, but for the state as well.
3) The effect divorce can have on the children involved.
Response to the bill has been mixed and many wonder whether extending the period of time will really make a difference or not and there are already options out there for saving money during divorce proceedings. The example given in the article is the “flat-fee divorce” which allows couples to pay a single attorney fee for services rendered in divorce proceedings.
In California it is already the law that a party must wait 6 months and one day from the date of filing for divorce for a decree of divorce to be finalized.
If you have further questions about California Divorce Law, please contact my Sunnyvale Family Lawyer Office, we proudly serve San Jose, Santa Clara, Milpitas, Cupertino, and Los Gatos.
Child Custody and Needs of Children During Divorce Process
I read an interesting article this week about divorce and remembering children’s needs. The article is written about the personal experience of the author during her divorce. In her county anyone with children under 18 that desires to be divorced needs to take a mandatory parenting class. At her first class she realizes that children don’t want to be caught in the midst of an ugly divorce and came to the conclusion that in a “healthy divorce,” one has to love your children more than you don’t love your ex. She adds that she doesn’t regret the marriage because it produced two beautiful children. When asking her close friend who is also counselor for more advice for parents to help their children through a divorce she was told, “Parents can do a great deal to help their children transform divorce into a positive experience. Kids have to learn how to cope throughout the divorce journey.”
To help kids survive and thrive from the experience of divorce, parents must respect their children’s feelings. Parents need to accept they can’t make the discomfort of divorce disappear, but they can give their kids a safe space in which to freely express their emotions. Parents need to remember that their children love both of them and no matter how angry the parents are with each other, they must take into consideration that their anger towards each other affects their children. No child wants to take sides, and asking a child to do so is extremely painful and detrimental to the child’s emotional well being.
It may seem like a nuisance, but the idea of a mandatory parenting class for those who want a divorce is a good idea. Many parents are so caught up in their dislike for the other that they forget their children’s needs. You may not like your soon to be ex, but the children are innocent to the situation. It’s very hard for them to have to choose between parents and if resources such as parenting classes are available it may help the family itself to cope with the pending divorce.
If you are having trouble with a child custody dispute during your divorce process please contact my San Jose Family Lawyer Office, we proudly serve Santa Clara, Sunnyvale, Milpitas, Cupertino, and surrounding Bay Area.
To help kids survive and thrive from the experience of divorce, parents must respect their children’s feelings. Parents need to accept they can’t make the discomfort of divorce disappear, but they can give their kids a safe space in which to freely express their emotions. Parents need to remember that their children love both of them and no matter how angry the parents are with each other, they must take into consideration that their anger towards each other affects their children. No child wants to take sides, and asking a child to do so is extremely painful and detrimental to the child’s emotional well being.
It may seem like a nuisance, but the idea of a mandatory parenting class for those who want a divorce is a good idea. Many parents are so caught up in their dislike for the other that they forget their children’s needs. You may not like your soon to be ex, but the children are innocent to the situation. It’s very hard for them to have to choose between parents and if resources such as parenting classes are available it may help the family itself to cope with the pending divorce.
If you are having trouble with a child custody dispute during your divorce process please contact my San Jose Family Lawyer Office, we proudly serve Santa Clara, Sunnyvale, Milpitas, Cupertino, and surrounding Bay Area.
Wednesday, March 10, 2010
Lesbian LGBT Partners and Paternity Case
I read an interesting article regarding a lesbian couple and the quest to settle their paternity dispute. The case had apparently drawn a lot of attention because the biological mother had become involved with the sperm donor creating a paternity conundrum.
An agreement was reached this week stating that both women will be recognized as legal parents of their twins. It’s not clear what rights if any were given to the donor. The women split just over a year and half after their commitment ceremony, never registered as a domestic partnership with the state though they were registered as such with the non-biological mother’s insurance.
Both women are listed as parents on the children's birth certificate, and the boys carry a hyphenated last name. The biological mother stated that they had never formalized their relationship because of continual problems and no legal arrangements were made between them or the sperm donor about parental rights before or after the children were born.
The two women opted to settle, but the biological mother’s attorney felt that had the biological parents decided to litigate they would have been successful at trial since California law is very clear that there is no presumed parent issue when you have both biological parents asserting their rights to their children and it’s not possible to have custody or visitation rights when you do not meet the criteria of a presumed parent.
However the non-biological mother’s attorney disagreed, stating that the two women had agreed to parent the children together before the sperm donor became an issue. This case poses many challenges for non traditional families. The case law is just beginning to be written and the legal battle field is ripe for challenges. You should always attempt to do things as legally as possible so that whenever a challenge comes up you are prepared to show that you've done everything in your power to be legal and correct in the family that you are asserting you are a part of. The non biological mother could have very well lost any rights once the sperm donor asserted a right to paternity. In the LGBT friendly Family law offices, we routinely handle with sensitivity and compassion family law for the LGBT community. Should you have any LGBT child custody matters please contact my office.
An agreement was reached this week stating that both women will be recognized as legal parents of their twins. It’s not clear what rights if any were given to the donor. The women split just over a year and half after their commitment ceremony, never registered as a domestic partnership with the state though they were registered as such with the non-biological mother’s insurance.
Both women are listed as parents on the children's birth certificate, and the boys carry a hyphenated last name. The biological mother stated that they had never formalized their relationship because of continual problems and no legal arrangements were made between them or the sperm donor about parental rights before or after the children were born.
The two women opted to settle, but the biological mother’s attorney felt that had the biological parents decided to litigate they would have been successful at trial since California law is very clear that there is no presumed parent issue when you have both biological parents asserting their rights to their children and it’s not possible to have custody or visitation rights when you do not meet the criteria of a presumed parent.
However the non-biological mother’s attorney disagreed, stating that the two women had agreed to parent the children together before the sperm donor became an issue. This case poses many challenges for non traditional families. The case law is just beginning to be written and the legal battle field is ripe for challenges. You should always attempt to do things as legally as possible so that whenever a challenge comes up you are prepared to show that you've done everything in your power to be legal and correct in the family that you are asserting you are a part of. The non biological mother could have very well lost any rights once the sperm donor asserted a right to paternity. In the LGBT friendly Family law offices, we routinely handle with sensitivity and compassion family law for the LGBT community. Should you have any LGBT child custody matters please contact my office.
Tuesday, March 9, 2010
Child Custody Move Aways and Online Dating
I read an interesting article this week regarding the new realities of online dating and it's result on child custody battles. Move away contests are often the most contentious in custody litigation. Results of a recent study suggest some parents are not upfront about new relationships when they go to court requesting to relocate their children.
University of Sydney researchers had been following a group of 80 men and women since 2006. They claim the growth of internet romances is combining with a rise in broken relationships and increases in international mobility. Dating sites have significantly increased the opportunities for separated parents to meet new people, and the connections formed are supported by affordable modes of communication like email, chatrooms, and web-based telephone or video.
The legal costs of relocating often reached hundreds of thousands of dollars and the costs of maintaining contact with children were as much as $15,000 a year. Relocation disputes are often the most difficult decisions judges make.
They end in expensive court cases and it is almost always the mother who wants to move, making gender a major issue in the debate. Dating relationships are important, but the relationship with the ability for all parents to be actively involved in their childrens lives is more important. Here in the San Jose Child Custody Law offices,, we practice a child centered and child focused practice. We genuinely seek to find the solution that is in the best interest of the child. We also practice Affordable Limited Scope Services for Custody and Support.
University of Sydney researchers had been following a group of 80 men and women since 2006. They claim the growth of internet romances is combining with a rise in broken relationships and increases in international mobility. Dating sites have significantly increased the opportunities for separated parents to meet new people, and the connections formed are supported by affordable modes of communication like email, chatrooms, and web-based telephone or video.
The legal costs of relocating often reached hundreds of thousands of dollars and the costs of maintaining contact with children were as much as $15,000 a year. Relocation disputes are often the most difficult decisions judges make.
They end in expensive court cases and it is almost always the mother who wants to move, making gender a major issue in the debate. Dating relationships are important, but the relationship with the ability for all parents to be actively involved in their childrens lives is more important. Here in the San Jose Child Custody Law offices,, we practice a child centered and child focused practice. We genuinely seek to find the solution that is in the best interest of the child. We also practice Affordable Limited Scope Services for Custody and Support.
Thursday, March 4, 2010
Top: Affordable San Jose Family Law Solutions in Santa Clara County
Many potential clients come into my office in a great panic due to an upcoming court case. The bottom line is they are in a pressing legal need, but they have no money to afford a lawyer. The wife or husband has hired a lawyer and decided to take them to court over some family law issue. Whether the wife now wants full custody of the children or the husband wants to modify spousal support or child support that he is presently paying. These scenarios put many people rightly so in a panicked state because they now are left with the pressing issue of whether to secure legal representation or attempt a go at it alone.
As many self represented individuals are acutely aware, the legal system especially in Santa Clara County is not a friendly place for self represented individuals. There are many technical challenges from filing paperwork properly to navigating correct civil procedure. If there are even the tiniest of mistakes a court paper may be rejected or a worse yet a case may be rejected entirely due to what are seemingly small errors.
When potential clients speak to me about these pressing issues and then present me with the problem of the lack of funds. I always tell potential clients that there are options available to them. I firstly tell them about my services. In California there is the option of limited scope family law service or unbundled services. What this means is that a lawyer can agree to represent a client for a limited portion of their case. Whether that portion be filing a motion, drafting a declaration, explaining court procedure, reviewing their case and giving legal strategy and advice. A limited scope attorney may even appear in court for a client. This flexibility provides the client with avoiding having to pay a full retainer which is typically $2,000 - $5,000 for full attorney representation. The client can essentially pay as you go and get representation when they can afford it. The downside with this arrangement is that the lawyer can only represent them for the agreed upon amount of work. Once the work is complete the client is again self represented and is ultimately still responsible for their own case. This process works for those with a good grasp on their case, or those who can not afford a full attorney retainer.
There are other free and modest means options for those seeking low cost San Jose Family Lawyer advice. I recommend that clients with no money speak with the Pro Bono Project of Silicon Valley, they do on occasion represent clients for free. Mostly the representation is related to domestic violence, but they do take certain family law cases. The other option is the Legal Aid Society of Santa Clara County who does take family law cases for free. There is the Family Law Facilitator’s office in the Santa Clara County court system. They have well regarded attorneys there who can assist those who can not afford any representation at all. They however can not represent you in court. Lastly, there is the Modest Means Panel with the Santa Clara County Bar Association. They offer low cost and sliding scale attorney’s for family law matters.
My law office, offers Affordable Limited Scope representation in Santa Clara County.
As many self represented individuals are acutely aware, the legal system especially in Santa Clara County is not a friendly place for self represented individuals. There are many technical challenges from filing paperwork properly to navigating correct civil procedure. If there are even the tiniest of mistakes a court paper may be rejected or a worse yet a case may be rejected entirely due to what are seemingly small errors.
When potential clients speak to me about these pressing issues and then present me with the problem of the lack of funds. I always tell potential clients that there are options available to them. I firstly tell them about my services. In California there is the option of limited scope family law service or unbundled services. What this means is that a lawyer can agree to represent a client for a limited portion of their case. Whether that portion be filing a motion, drafting a declaration, explaining court procedure, reviewing their case and giving legal strategy and advice. A limited scope attorney may even appear in court for a client. This flexibility provides the client with avoiding having to pay a full retainer which is typically $2,000 - $5,000 for full attorney representation. The client can essentially pay as you go and get representation when they can afford it. The downside with this arrangement is that the lawyer can only represent them for the agreed upon amount of work. Once the work is complete the client is again self represented and is ultimately still responsible for their own case. This process works for those with a good grasp on their case, or those who can not afford a full attorney retainer.
There are other free and modest means options for those seeking low cost San Jose Family Lawyer advice. I recommend that clients with no money speak with the Pro Bono Project of Silicon Valley, they do on occasion represent clients for free. Mostly the representation is related to domestic violence, but they do take certain family law cases. The other option is the Legal Aid Society of Santa Clara County who does take family law cases for free. There is the Family Law Facilitator’s office in the Santa Clara County court system. They have well regarded attorneys there who can assist those who can not afford any representation at all. They however can not represent you in court. Lastly, there is the Modest Means Panel with the Santa Clara County Bar Association. They offer low cost and sliding scale attorney’s for family law matters.
My law office, offers Affordable Limited Scope representation in Santa Clara County.
Domestic Violence and the Lack of Mediation
I read a puzzling article regarding the rights of domestic violence victims to attend mediation. The prevention from attending mediation was borne from a desire to protect battered womens rights after reporting the abuse. There are many studies that show that mediation is a good alternative to litigation. Litigation is often antagonistic and is often faster than traditional litigation. In Mediation it often leads to less bitterness and more positive feelings towards the outcome of the divorce.
The victim of domestic violence by denying her right to mediation must be subjected to litigation. In litigation the abuser is entitled to cross examine the victim and psychological damage them once again in front of a court room.
In Santa Clara County, thankfully there is court ordered mediation for certain domestic violence trials. However if mediation is unsuccessful often a skilled attorney must be present to assist in the litigation. I would be happy to discuss your San Jose Domestic Violence issue in my Santa Clara County Family Law Office.
The victim of domestic violence by denying her right to mediation must be subjected to litigation. In litigation the abuser is entitled to cross examine the victim and psychological damage them once again in front of a court room.
In Santa Clara County, thankfully there is court ordered mediation for certain domestic violence trials. However if mediation is unsuccessful often a skilled attorney must be present to assist in the litigation. I would be happy to discuss your San Jose Domestic Violence issue in my Santa Clara County Family Law Office.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)