JPMorgan Chase to Pay $5 Million for Sex Discrimination Against Dads — Blog

May 31, 2019 by Robert Franklin, Member, National Board of Directors, National Parents Organization JP Morgan Chase and Company has agreed to pay $5 million to settle a sex discrimination suit filed by a father who was denied parental leave (MSN, 5/30/19).The payout resolves a 2017 complaint brought by the American Civil Liberties Union alleging bias against Derek Rotondo, who…

via JPMorgan Chase to Pay $5 Million for Sex Discrimination Against Dads — Blog

Just more evidence of the blatant bias against fathers in society today.  Derek Rotondo is fortunate that the EEOC ruled in his favor.  More men need to file complaints like this.

Fatherless homes impose a huge cost on society

63% of youth suicides are from fatherless homes (US Dept. Of Health/Census) – 5 times the average. 90% of all homeless and runaway children are from fatherless homes – 32 times the average. 85% of all children who show behavior disorders come from fatherless homes – 20 times the average. (Center for Disease Control) 80% […]

via Statistics — The Fatherless Generation

The reader will note that all of these statistics are complied by government agencies.  The huge cost that fatherless homes impose on society has been known for many years and yet fathers, and men in general are mocked and vilified.

Keeping Your Wits About You: Critical Thinking for Alienated Parents — Karen Woodall

If you can keep your wits about you while all others are losing theirs, and blaming you. The world will be yours and everything in it, what’s more, you’ll be a man, my son. Rudyard Kipling Alienation is a relational dynamic like no other and it can send you into a spiral of madness if […]

via Keeping Your Wits About You: Critical Thinking for Alienated Parents — Karen Woodall

Excellent blog post with some very useful advice.

Opposing a domestic violence restraining order in California

Opposing a domestic violence restraining order in California.
Opposing a domestic violence restraining order in California.

Opposing a domestic violence restraining order in California is the topic of this blog post.

Opposing a domestic violence restraining order in California is extremely important as the length of a permanent domestic violence restraining order in California is generally three (3) years and in some cases even longer. The serious consequences that can result from having a domestic violence restraining order entered against you include the fact that any person that violates a restraining order, or even is alleged to have violated a restraining order is subject to arrest.

The negative consequences that result from having a restraining order entered against you include limiting or even temporarily eliminating your rights under the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution to own or possess any guns, firearms or even ammunition.  It can also negatively impact your employment and sometimes your reputation in the community as well.

Opposing a domestic violence restraining order in California can be difficult if all that you have is the word of the victim against your own word where there are no pictures or witnesses to support your side of the story. Proper preparation can enable you to properly challenge the issuance of a restraining order and possibly convince the court that one is not necessary. Because of the various serious consequences of a restraining order you should consult an experienced attorney who has knowledge with these types of legal issues if you can afford it.

The first essential preparation for any defense will be to study the law in order to understand the elements required for the particular type of restraining order that is being sought. For instance, in the State of California there are several different types of restraining orders such as civil harassment, domestic violence restraining orders, restraining orders involving elder abuse, workplace violence, emergency protective orders, and criminal protective orders. Researching the law regarding the particular type of restraining order that is being sought will allow you to determine who has the authority to issue them, the burden of proof required in order to obtain the restraining order, the duration of the restraining order, and most important of all, what elements are required in order to obtain them.

The second essential preparation for an effective defense is to carefully review the allegations made in order to determine if those allegations do or do not apply to each element required for the particular order of protection being requested.

One common example would be the issuance of a temporary restraining order in California based on an allegation of domestic violence. In that case the burden of proof is very low; a reasonableness of abuse or possible abuse will be enough.

This burden of proof will entitle the protected party to a temporary restraining order that will last only until an evidentiary hearing can be held to determine if a longer protective order such as a permanent order should be issued. In order to obtain a restraining order with a longer duration requires a higher burden of proof known as a finding of a preponderance of the evidence. A preponderance of the evidence means that the party that has the most evidence supporting their position will prevail. Many judges would agree that where it can be shown “it is more likely than not” that the elements necessitating a restraining order are met, that a restraining order must be issued by law.

In order to obtain any long-term restraining order based on domestic violence the protected party will need to show both a relationship and abuse. The elements of abuse for domestic violence are detailed in California Family Law Code § 6300 et seq.

The third essential preparation for an effective defense is for the defending party or their attorney to persuade the court that the allegations asserted by the other party do not fit the definition of abuse. Frequently, individuals who are not prepared properly for this type of hearing almost immediately make damaging admissions that necessitate a restraining order be issued, even if the admitted activity was in fact innocent.

In some cases a declaration will be filed by the protected party that is exaggerated or consists mostly of vague generalizations with no specific facts provided. In these situations a good argument can be made that the other party has failed to provide any specific details of circumstances and is therefore not credible because of the lack of details. For instance if the declaration alleges that the petitioner has been harassed numerous times a defense strategy would be to request that the petitioner identify each and every instance of harassment and whether the communication was not proper meaning a communication that served no legitimate interest. The burden of proof is on the petitioner requesting the restraining order to prove each and every element required under the law. The duty of the defending party is to attack the credibility of the petitioner.

If you do not have the money for an attorney but still want to file a response so that you can give your side of the story to the Court you can download Judicial Council Form DV120-Response to Request for Domestic Violence Restraining Order by clicking the link below.

http://www.courts.ca.gov/documents/dv120.pdf

Sample legal template for opposing a domestic violence restraining order in California for sale.

Attorneys or parties who would like to view a portion of a sample points and authorities in support of a response opposing a domestic violence restraining order in California containing brief instructions, a memorandum of points and authorities with citations to case law and statutory authority and sample declaration sold by the author can see below.

 

Over 300 sample legal documents for California and Federal litigation for sale.

To view more information on over 300 sample legal documents for California and Federal litigation visit: https://legaldocspro.myshopify.com/products

The author of this blog post, Stan Burman, is an entrepreneur and retired litigation paralegal that worked in California and Federal litigation from January 1995 through September 2017 and has created over 300 sample legal documents for sale. He believes in Father’s Rights as he has seen first-hand the incredible bias against fathers in the family law courts in California. He is currently working on creating digital products that will assist fathers both in California and throughout the United States to represent themselves without an attorney in Court regarding custody and support issues.

Follow Fathers rights on Twitter at:

https://twitter.com/Fathersrights16

Follow Fathers rights on Facebook at:

https://www.facebook.com/Fathersrights10/

DISCLAIMER:

Please note that the author of this blog post, Stan Burman is NOT an attorney and as such is unable to provide any specific legal advice. The author is NOT engaged in providing any legal, financial, or other professional services, and any information contained in this blog post is NOT intended to constitute legal advice.

The materials and information contained in this blog post have been prepared by Stan Burman for informational purposes only and are not legal advice. Transmission of the information contained in this blog post is not intended to create, and receipt does not constitute, any business relationship between the author and any readers. Readers should not act upon this information without seeking professional counsel.

 

 

 

 

 

Opposing temporary spousal support in California.

Opposing temporary spousal support in California
Opposing temporary spousal support in California.

Opposing temporary spousal support in California is the topic of this blog post.

The deadline to file and serve documents opposing temporary spousal support in California is at least nine (9) Court days before the hearing unless the court has ordered otherwise and the opposition should be served by personal service, overnight mail or a courier service that provides overnight delivery pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 1005.

Any party served with a request for order for temporary spousal support in California should first carefully review the motion and supporting documents to determine if the moving party has met their burden of showing both their need for temporary spousal support, and your ability to pay.

Common grounds for opposing temporary spousal support in California are that,

(1) the party requesting temporary spousal support has the ability and the opportunity to work but instead keeps quitting their jobs and refuses to work, instead expecting the other party to support them, and

(2) the party requesting temporary spousal support has failed to meet their burden of showing a need for temporary spousal support, and the ability of the other party to pay.

The first condition that must be shown before temporary spousal support can be ordered is a need for spousal support.

A California Court of Appeal has stated in a published decision that an award of temporary spousal support is usually based on a showing of two conditions: the moving party’s needs, and the other party’s ability to pay.

Another California Court of Appeal has stated in a published decision that a trial court can consider earning capacity in determining spousal support.

The California Supreme Court has stated that earning capacity is defined as the income the spouse is reasonably capable of earning based upon the spouse’s age, health, education, marketable skills, employment history, and the availability of employment opportunities.

Sample opposition for opposing temporary spousal support in California for sale.

Attorneys or parties in California that would like to view a portion of a sample 12 page opposition for opposing a request for temporary spousal support in California containing brief instructions, a memorandum of points and authorities with citations to case law and statutory authority, sample declaration and proof of service sold by the author can see below.

 

Over 300 sample legal documents for California and Federal litigation for sale.

To view more information on over 300 sample legal documents for California and Federal litigation visit: https://legaldocspro.myshopify.com/products

The author of this blog post, Stan Burman, is an entrepreneur and retired litigation paralegal that worked in California and Federal litigation from January 1995 through September 2017 and has created over 300 sample legal documents for sale. He believes in Father’s Rights as he has seen first-hand the incredible bias against fathers in the family law courts in California. He is currently working on creating digital products that will assist fathers both in California and throughout the United States to represent themselves without an attorney in Court regarding custody and support issues.

Follow Fathers rights on Twitter at:

https://twitter.com/Fathersrights16

Follow Fathers rights on Facebook at:

https://www.facebook.com/Fathersrights10/

DISCLAIMER:

Please note that the author of this blog post, Stan Burman is NOT an attorney and as such is unable to provide any specific legal advice. The author is NOT engaged in providing any legal, financial, or other professional services, and any information contained in this blog post is NOT intended to constitute legal advice.

The materials and information contained in this blog post have been prepared by Stan Burman for informational purposes only and are not legal advice. Transmission of the information contained in this blog post is not intended to create, and receipt does not constitute, any business relationship between the author and any readers. Readers should not act upon this information without seeking professional counsel.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Opposing an OSC for contempt in a California divorce

Opposing an OSC for contempt in a California divorce
Opposing an OSC for contempt in a California divorce.

Opposing an OSC for contempt in a California divorce is the topic of this blog post.

Opposing an OSC for contempt in a California divorce is very important and any opposition to an OSC for contempt in California family law should be filed and served at least nine (9) Court days before the hearing pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 1005 unless the Court has ordered otherwise.

If you have been served with an order to show cause for contempt in California the first thing you should do is to carefully review the order to show cause and supporting affidavit to determine what grounds for opposition exist.

Grounds for Opposing an OSC for contempt in a California divorce.

Possible grounds for opposing an OSC for contempt in a California divorce would include situations where the alleged child support arrearages first became due more than three (3) years ago. Therefore any child support amounts that are alleged to be owed that became due more than three (3) years ago are barred by the statute of limitations found in Code of Civil Procedure § 1218.5(b) which states in pertinent part that,

“If the contempt alleged is the failure to pay child, family, or spousal support, the period of limitations for commencing a contempt action is three years from the date that the payment was due”.

And if you were truly unable to pay the child support or comply with another Court order and can prove that by a preponderance of the evidence you should not be held in contempt.

Other possible grounds could include a case where the other party is alleging that you violated a Court order other than an order to pay support. In that case any alleged violations that occurred more than two (2) years ago are barred by the statute of limitations found in Code of Civil Procedure § 1218.5(b) which states in pertinent part that,

“A contempt action to enforce any other order made under the Family Code must be brought within two years “from the time that the alleged contempt occurred.”

You may also be entitled to what are known as “Jackson credits” towards any alleged child support arrearages for the period of time that the minor child or children physically resided with you as you are considered to have directly discharged your support obligation to the minor children.

Your opposition should contain a declaration stating the facts that support your affirmative defenses including any exhibits that support your affirmative defenses.

Remember that the party that filed the order to show cause for contempt must prove to the Court that you are guilty of contempt beyond a reasonable doubt. However you are only required to prove your affirmative defenses by a preponderance of the evidence in order to prevail in Court.

Sample opposition for opposing an OSC for contempt in a California divorce for sale.

Attorneys or parties in California that would like to view a portion of an 11 page sample opposition to an order to show cause for contempt in a California divorce containing brief instructions, a memorandum of points and authorities with citations to case law and statutory authority, sample declaration and proof of service can see below.

 

Over 300 sample legal documents for California and Federal litigation for sale.

To view more information on over 300 sample legal documents for California and Federal litigation visit: https://legaldocspro.myshopify.com/products

The author of this blog post, Stan Burman, is an entrepreneur and retired litigation paralegal that worked in California and Federal litigation from January 1995 through September 2017 and has created over 300 sample legal documents for sale. He believes in Father’s Rights as he has seen first-hand the incredible bias against fathers in the family law courts in California. He is currently working on creating digital products that will assist fathers both in California and throughout the United States to represent themselves without an attorney in Court regarding custody and support issues.

Follow Fathers rights on Twitter at:

https://twitter.com/Fathersrights16

Follow Fathers Rights on Facebook at:

https://www.facebook.com/Fathersrights10/

DISCLAIMER:

Please note that the author of this blog post, Stan Burman is NOT an attorney and as such is unable to provide any specific legal advice. The author is NOT engaged in providing any legal, financial, or other professional services, and any information contained in this blog post is NOT intended to constitute legal advice.

The materials and information contained in this blog post have been prepared by Stan Burman for informational purposes only and are not legal advice. Transmission of the information contained in this blog post is not intended to create, and receipt does not constitute, any business relationship between the author and any readers. Readers should not act upon this information without seeking professional counsel.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Request to reduce spousal support in California

Request to reduce spousal support in California
Request to reduce spousal support in California.

A request to reduce spousal support in California is the topic of this blog post.

A request to reduce spousal support in California should be filed in situations where you can show a material change of circumstances since the date of the last spousal support order.

Family Code § 3651(a) provides that, with specified exceptions,

“a support order may be modified or terminated at any time as the court determines to be necessary.”

An order for spousal support may not be modified or terminated, however, if the parties have so agreed in a written agreement or in an oral agreement entered into in open court pursuant to Family Code § 3651(d).

The law in California is settled that the party seeking a modification of spousal support has the burden of showing a material change of circumstances since the date of the last spousal support order.

A material change of circumstances may include situations such as:

A decrease in your income since the date of the last spousal support order.

The other party does not require the same level of spousal support due to a substantial increase in their income.

The California Courts of Appeal have ruled in published decisions that a modification of spousal support is justified when the moving party has met their burden of demonstrating a material change of circumstances, since the last order was issued, in the relevant factors that affect need and ability to pay. A material change of circumstances is justified in situations where there has been a reduction or increase in the ability of the supporting spouse to pay and/or in situations where there has been a reduction or increase in the needs of the supported spouse. The trial court has very broad discretion in determining if a material change of circumstances exists.

Family Code § 4336(a) states in pertinent part that,

“Except on written agreement of the parties to the contrary or a court order terminating spousal support, the court retains jurisdiction indefinitely in a proceeding for dissolution of marriage … where the marriage is of long duration.”

Family Code § 4336(b) states in pertinent part that for the purpose of retaining jurisdiction, there is a presumption affecting the burden of producing evidence that a marriage of 10 years or more, from the date of marriage to the date of separation, is a marriage of long duration.

However a California Court of Appeal recently ruled in a published decision that even if a marriage has been a lengthy one that by itself does not justify an unlimited spousal support award. Unless a spouse can show specific facts that show they are incapable of becoming self-supporting they cannot expect to receive spousal support payments indefinitely.

Sample points and authorities in support of a request to reduce spousal support in California for sale.

Attorneys or parties in California that would like to view a portion of a sample points and authorities in support of a request to reduce spousal support in California containing brief instructions, citations to case law and statutory authority and a sample declaration sold by the author can see below.

 

Over 300 sample legal documents for California and Federal litigation for sale.

To view more information on over 300 sample legal documents for California and Federal litigation visit: https://legaldocspro.myshopify.com/products

The author of this blog post, Stan Burman, is an entrepreneur and retired litigation paralegal that worked in California and Federal litigation from January 1995 through September 2017 and has created over 300 sample legal documents for sale. He believes in Father’s Rights as he has seen first-hand the incredible bias against fathers in the family law courts in California. He is currently working on creating digital products that will assist fathers both in California and throughout the United States to represent themselves without an attorney in Court regarding custody and support issues.

Follow Fathers rights on Twitter at:

https://twitter.com/Fathersrights16

Follow Fathers rights on Facebook at:

https://www.facebook.com/Fathersrights10/

DISCLAIMER:

Please note that the author of this blog post, Stan Burman is NOT an attorney and as such is unable to provide any specific legal advice. The author is NOT engaged in providing any legal, financial, or other professional services, and any information contained in this blog post is NOT intended to constitute legal advice.

The materials and information contained in this blog post have been prepared by Stan Burman for informational purposes only and are not legal advice. Transmission of the information contained in this blog post is not intended to create, and receipt does not constitute, any business relationship between the author and any readers. Readers should not act upon this information without seeking professional counsel.