Blog
Free 30-Minute Family Law or Estate Planning Consultation
Contact Us
LONICH PATTON EHRLICH POLICASTRI
1871 The Alameda, Suite 400, San Jose, CA 95126
Phone: (408) 553-0801 | Fax: (408) 553-0807 | Email: contact@lpeplaw.com
LONICH PATTON EHRLICH POLICASTRI
Phone: (408) 553-0801
Fax: (408) 553-0807
Email: contact@lpeplaw.com
1871 The Alameda, Suite 400
San Jose, CA 95126
Located in San Jose, Lonich Patton Ehrlich Policastri handles matters for clients in northern California, specifically San Jose and Silicon Valley. Our services are available to anyone within the following counties: Santa Clara, San Mateo, Contra Costa, Santa Cruz, Monterey, San Benito, and San Francisco. For a full listing of areas where we practice, please click here.
MAKE A PAYMENT BY SCANNING THE QR CODE BELOW:

DISCLAIMER
This web site is intended for informational purposes only and is not legal advice. Nothing in the site is to be considered as either creating an attorney-client relationship between the reader and Lonich Patton Ehrlich Policastri or as rendering of legal advice for any specific matter. Readers are responsible for obtaining such advice from their own legal counsel. No client or other reader should act or refrain from acting on the basis of any information contained in Lonich Patton Ehrlich Policastri Web site without seeking appropriate legal or other professional advice on the particular facts and circumstances at issue.
© 2024 Lonich Patton Ehrlich Policastri. All rights reserved. Privacy Policy

Relocation and Child Custody
/in Family Law /by Mitchell EhrlichWhen parents share joint custody of their children, one party’s desire or need to relocate can require reevaluation of existing custody orders and can be an extremely complicated issue.
Recently, the California Court of Appeal for the Third District addressed a “move-away” issue in a case involving an unmarried couple and their minor daughter. After the parties’ relationship ended in December 2007, the mother moved to Washington with the child, then later returned to California. Upon her return, the father petitioned for custody of their daughter; in response, the mother filed a motion requesting permission to move back to Washington with their daughter. The trial court granted the parents joint legal and physical custody and denied mother’s request to move with the child. Thereafter, mother requested to move to Washington with the child several more times. At trial, she testified that she was moving to Washington because she had a job prospect and family support there. However, the court apparently did not believe that she would move without her daughter, and denied mother’s request to move with the child because it thought it would be disruptive to the child to leave her father and friends. Therefore, the prior joint custody order remained in place. It was impossible for mother to comply with the joint physical custody order if she moved to Washington, and therefore, the court’s decision effectively prohibited her from moving even without her daughter. The mother appealed and the appellate court found that the trial court order amounted to a coercive attempt to get the mother to change her plans to move. The court does not have the ability to prohibit a parent from moving, only to determine where the child should live as a result of the parent’s decision to move. They reversed and remanded the decision for reconsideration.
The appellate court noted that in joint custody cases, when a parent is considering a move that makes the existing custody plan unworkable, the court must consider the child’s best interests de novo and make a determination of what physical custody arrangement would be in the child’s best interests- either relocating with the moving parent or remaining with the non-moving parent and having visits with the moving parent. Then, the court must fashion an appropriate parenting plan that takes into account the fact that the parents live in separate states.
Jacob A. v. C.H., 196 Cal. App. 4th 1591 (2011).
The Certified Family Law Specialists* at Lonich Patton Erlich Policastri have decades of experience handling complex and heavily disputed custody issues like this one. If you are contemplating moving and have joint custody of your child, please contact the Certified Family Law Specialists* at Lonich Patton Erlich Policastri, who can provide you with an in-depth analysis of your issues. Please remember that each individual situation is unique and results discussed in this post are not a guarantee of future results. While this post may include legal issues, it is not legal advice. Use of this site does not create an attorney-client relationship.
*Certified Family Law Specialist, The State Bar of California Board of Legal Specialization
Actor Jon Cryer Ordered to Continue Child Support Payments Despite Having Primary Custody
/in Family Law /by Gina Policastri“Two and a Half Men” television show actor Jon Cryer pays his former wife a hefty $8,000 per month in child support, even though he has close to full custody of their son. Cryer has 96% of the parenting time while Sarah Trigger Cryer only has 4%.
The two married in 2000 and divorced four years later. Sarah, also an actor, has not had a job since 2005 and is not inclined to look for work. Jon and Sarah each remarried and Sarah had a second child. Following a divorce from her second Husband, Sarah had custody of both her children when, in 2009, the two boys were removed from her after she was accused of being an unfit parent by Jon for leaving their son unsupervised, admonished by the court for negligent parenting, and allowed her second child to be injured while under her care. Jon was awarded physical custody of their son.
Thereafter, Jon requested a reduction of his child support payments from $10,000 per month to zero, as he was now the sole custodial parent. However, the trial court simply lowered the payments to $8,000 per month. On appeal, the court determined that despite Jon’s increased timeshare, any further reduction would be against the best interests of their child and have a detrimental effect, pointing to the fact that Sarah was in the process of reunifying with their son, and that a reduction in support would not allow her to maintain the home that their son would eventually return to once they were fully reunified.
Child support and child custody issues are difficult and complicated. The Certified Family Law Specialists* at Lonich Patton Erlich Policastri have decades of experience handling complex and heavily disputed child support issues. If you are involved in a contested child support case, contact the Certified Family Law Specialists* at Lonich Patton Erlich Policastri. Please remember that each individual situation is unique and results discussed in this post are not a guarantee of future results. While this post may include legal issues, it is not legal advice. Use of this site does not create an attorney-client relationship.
*Certified Family Law Specialist, The State Bar of California Board of Legal Specialization.
Tough Times Call for . . . More Estate Taxes?
/in Estate Planning /by Michael LonichIt is no secret that, in the present economy, states are looking to increase revenue any way they can. A report published earlier this year showed that total state tax revenue decreased by more than $14 billion from 2009 to 2010, a two-percent drop. So, not surprisingly, while fewer members of the wealthier class will owe an estate tax to the federal government, they may find that they owe it to the state.
Though the trend is not widespread, many states are looking to increase their receipt of estate taxes. Connecticut collects on estates of more than $3.5 million but wants to lower the exemption to $2 million; the state’s legislature is currently taking this proposal into consideration. Illinois reinstated its estate tax in 2011 with a $2 million exemption. And in 2010, Hawaii imposed an estate tax on residents and Hawaiian assets of non-resident, non-U.S. citizens.
Estate tax rules vary greatly across the country. A few states assess an inheritance tax and others an estate tax. Inheritance tax, now uncommon, is levied on assets a beneficiary gets; estate tax is collected based on the whole estate. About half of the states have an estate tax, with rates that range from 1% to 16%. It is worthwhile to note that some states are moving to reduce or eliminate the estate tax where estate taxes are not a huge source of revenue. In California, for example, decedents who passed away after January 1, 2005, are not subject to a California estate tax.
If you are interested in learning more about estate planning, contact the San Jose estate planning attorneys at Lonich Patton Erlich Policastri, LLP. Please remember that each individual situation is unique and results discussed in this post are not a guarantee of future results. While this post may include legal issues, it is not legal advice. Use of this site does not create an attorney-client relationship.
Los Gatos Art and Wine Festival Raffle Winners
/in Estate Planning, In the Community /by Michael LonichCongratulations to our raffle winners from the Los Gatos Fiesta de Artes:
Thank you to everyone who stopped by the Lonich Patton Erlich Policastri booth at the Los Gatos Fiesta de Artes a few weeks ago. We had a wonderful time visiting with you and enjoyed participating in the community event. We hope to see everyone again next year.
Ensuring the Creation of a Valid Trust
/in Estate Planning /by Michael LonichMany Californians fail to realize that a valid trust is created only if there is trust property. It is, therefore, very important to expressly transfer some piece of property, real or personal to the trust when making estate plans.
Whether property is part of the estate (to be administered by the probate court) or part of a valid trust (to be administered by the trustee) is reserved for the court. While written declarations and general assignments may be effective in transferring property to the trust and avoiding probate, this is not a risk that should be taken. A court must consider each case on its merits and this process typically ties family assets up in litigation, delays administration of the trust, and results in substantial attorney and court fees. An estate plan, designed to ensure that family and financial goals are met, can suddenly become a nightmarish burden on grieving loved ones.
Consulting an experienced estate planning attorney when planning for the future will ensure a trust is properly funded and timely administered. If you are interested in learning more about individual estate planning or creating a comprehensive plan so your family members are well-prepared to handle your estate, contact the San Jose estate planning attorneys at Lonich Patton Erlich Policastri, LLP. Please remember that each individual situation is unique and results discussed in this post are not a guarantee of future results. While this post may include legal issues, it is not legal advice. Use of this site does not create an attorney-client relationship.