• Facebook
  • Youtube
  • Linkedin
  • Twitter
  • Instagram
  • Vk
Call Us At: (408) 553-0801
Lonich Patton Ehrlich Policastri
  • Home
  • About
    • Why LPEP
    • Our Attorneys
    • Locations
      • San Jose
      • Santa Cruz
      • San Francisco
    • Testimonials
  • LPEP Spotlight
  • Practice Areas
    • Family Law
      • Annulments
      • Certified Family Law Specialists
      • Child Custody and Visitation
      • Child Support
      • Divorce and Your Estate
      • Divorce Litigation
      • Divorce Planning
      • Domestic Partnerships
      • Domestic Violence
      • Enforcement and Modifications
      • Extramarital Affairs
      • Grandparents’ Rights
      • Harassment
      • Legal Separation
      • Mediation and Collaborative Divorce
      • Parental Relocations
      • Paternity
      • Postnuptial Agreements
      • Prenuptial Agreements
      • Property Division
      • Restraining Orders
      • Same Sex Divorce
      • Spousal Support and Alimony
    • Estate Planning
      • Business Succession Planning
      • Power of Attorney
      • Probate
      • Trust Administration
      • Trust and Probate Litigation
      • Trusts
      • Wills
    • Family Law Mediation
  • FAQ
    • Estate Planning FAQ
    • Family Law FAQ
  • Blog
  • Pay Now
  • Resources
    • Family Law Resources
    • Family Law Terms
    • Estate Planning Resources
  • Contact Us
    • Careers
  • Get a Free Consultation
  • Menu

Posts

D.C. Provides Same-Sex Couples with Divorce

February 1, 2012/in Family Law /by Mitchell Ehrlich

This summer, the Wyoming Supreme Court ruled that the state’s courts had jurisdiction to grant the divorce of a same-sex Wyoming couple who legally married in Canada.  (See Blog).  Now, Washington D.C. is set to provide same-sex couples who got married in the District of Columbia with a way to get divorced.  (See Article)

D.C. began allowing same-sex marriage in 2010; however, those marriages are not recognized in most jurisdictions, which means that divorce proceedings cannot be started since the marriages are not recognized in the first place.  After hearing reports that same-sex couples who wed in D.C. were being denied divorces after moving to jurisdictions that do not recognize same-sex marriage, a D.C. councilman proposed legislation to help give these couples more options.  The bill removes a six-month waiting period during which someone seeking a divorce must reside in the district, as long as the marriage took place in D.C.

Same-sex marriage and divorce continues to be a developing area of family law.  New York considered a same-sex divorce case in early 2008 when a judge granted a divorce to a same-sex couple married in Canada.  An Oklahoma court granted a divorce to a same-sex couple who married in Canada and filed using just their first initials and last names, only to revoke it upon discovering both parties were women on the grounds they were never legally married.  As noted in the Wyoming blog post, the California Legislature recently made significant amendments to the law governing same-sex divorces in California.  The State Assembly adopted the Separation Equity Act of 2010 which clarified that same-sex couples married outside the state are able to dissolve their marriage in California.  Additionally, same-sex couples who married during the brief period in 2008 when same sex marriage was legal have the rights and benefits of married couples, including divorce.

If you have a family law matter and are interested in learning more on the law governing same-sex marriage or divorce in California, please contact the experienced Family Law attorneys at Lonich Patton Erlich Policastri for further information.  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.

 

https://www.lpeplaw.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/LPEP_PC.png 0 0 Mitchell Ehrlich https://www.lpeplaw.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/LPEP_PC.png Mitchell Ehrlich2012-02-01 10:42:262021-12-22 21:31:24D.C. Provides Same-Sex Couples with Divorce

California Enforcement of Out-of-State Support Orders

October 19, 2011/1 Comment/in Family Law /by David Patton

If a child support order is obtained in another state and the custodial parent and child move to California, there are a few steps that need to be taken to enforce the out-of-state order.

All fifty states have adopted the Uniform Interstate Family Support Act (UIFSA).  The UIFSA governs when more than one state is involved in cases establishing, enforcing, or modifying child or spousal support orders.  The UIFSA helps to determine the jurisdiction and power of the courts in different states and establishes which state’s laws will be applied in the proceedings.

California’s version is codified in California Family Code section 4900 et al., which outlines the general procedures for enforcing support orders or income-withholding orders issued by another state.  Specified documents must be submitted to the California tribunal to register the order.  Then, the registered order is enforceable in the same manner and subject to the same procedure as an order issued by California.  It becomes a California judgment for any arrearages and subject to the same defenses as any other judgment.  Although California lacks jurisdiction to reduce or modify the support arrearages, it has the discretion to determine the manner in which the judgment will be enforced.

The Certified Family Law Specialists* at Lonich Patton Erlich Policastri have decades of experience handling complex and heavily disputed interstate child and spousal support enforcement issues.  If you have a child or spousal support enforcement issue, please contact the Certified Family Law Specialists* at Lonich Patton Erlich Policastri, who can provide you with an in depth analysis regarding your case.  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

 

https://www.lpeplaw.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/LPEP_PC.png 0 0 David Patton https://www.lpeplaw.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/LPEP_PC.png David Patton2011-10-19 13:55:472021-12-22 21:34:21California Enforcement of Out-of-State Support Orders

Relocation and Child Custody

September 14, 2011/in Family Law /by Mitchell Ehrlich

When 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

https://www.lpeplaw.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/LPEP_PC.png 0 0 Mitchell Ehrlich https://www.lpeplaw.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/LPEP_PC.png Mitchell Ehrlich2011-09-14 13:59:382021-12-22 21:35:31Relocation and Child Custody

Divorce Today: Navigating through Divorce Lawyers Online

July 25, 2011/in Family Law /by Mitchell Ehrlich

It used to be the case that people would turn to phonebooks to find an attorney.  Based on little more than an affinity for the particular lawyer’s ad—from an appealing graphic or clever quote—people would hire a lawyer.  Today, in the world of websites, ratings, and reviews, the landscape is much different.  With websites like Yelp and Avvo, providing clients with the opportunity to review their experience with an attorney, finding a qualified lawyer is only a few clicks away.

On Yelp, reviewers may review everything from cemeteries to restaurants to baby furniture.  Therefore it shouldn’t be surprising to learn that lawyers and law firms are frequently reviewed as well.  In an official blog, Yelp recently summarized what percent of reviews in each business category on Yelp were written by people within five year ranges.  Not surprisingly, searches and reviews for divorce lawyers are heaviest in the range of 30s all the way up to the mid-50s, an incredibly wide range of clients.

http://officialblog.yelp.com/2011/06/ages-of-yelp.html

When searching for a lawyer online, it is important to not only keep in mind what legal services you need but the source of the information posted.  A younger client does not necessarily seek the same attributes in a lawyer as an older client might.  Further, our legal system is adversarial and there is almost always a loser.  Clients who are upset with the outcome of their case may take it upon themselves to post overly negative reviews even though it is not an accurate reflection of the representation received.  Many times, reviews are not even written by an actual client.  So while online ratings and reviews may be incredibly helpful, it is important to be aware of who may be writing them.

The Certified Family Law Specialists as certified by The State Bar of California Board of Legal Specialization, at Lonich Patton Erlich Policastri have decades of experience handling divorce issues for clients in different stages of life.  If you are contemplating divorce or separation, please contact the Certified Family Law Specialists as certified by The State Bar of California Board of Legal Specialization 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.

 

https://www.lpeplaw.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/LPEP_PC.png 0 0 Mitchell Ehrlich https://www.lpeplaw.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/LPEP_PC.png Mitchell Ehrlich2011-07-25 09:36:572021-12-22 21:37:04Divorce Today: Navigating through Divorce Lawyers Online

Private Judging in Marital Dissolution Cases: Not Simply “For the Wealthy”

May 4, 2011/in Family Law /by Mitchell Ehrlich

There is a commonly held perception that hiring a Private Judge to handle a marital dissolution case is something that only the wealthy do.  Though there are additional costs incurred in using a Private Judge for Marital Dissolution proceedings, these costs are more than offset by other kinds of cash savings, which can be substantial.

What is a “Private Judge?”

A “Private Judge” is an attorney who meets specific legal qualifications and experience and who is appointed by the parties (by agreement).  A Temporary Judge/Private Judge generally has the same responsibilities, authority, and roles as those of the full time Superior Court Judge.

Hiring a Private Judge and Scope of Authority

The appointment of a Private Judge begins by a mutual agreement of the parties which is memorialized in a written Stipulation. The parties will agree on the scope of authority of the private judge, meaning what areas of the case the Private Judge will make decisions upon. A Private Judge can be an all purpose Judge handing all issues, or the parties can agree to limit the scope to particular issues, such as property division, support, child custody etc.

The Role of a Private Judge

A Private Judge’s ultimate role is to be a trial judge or finder of fact over disputed issues. If a matter does proceed to contested trial with a Private Judge, it will proceed in a manner identical to a trial in the Superior Court, with witness and expert testimony, documents, rules of evidence etc. except that the setting may be somewhat less formal (and therefore less intimidating, as they are often done in a conference room at the Private Judge’s office).

However, over and above that, and well prior to trial, a Private Judge can provide neutral, third party input on probable solutions and can be instrumental in settling cases short of trial through the case management and settlement conferences.

Costs and Cost Savings

Typically, Private Judges charge an hourly rate with the costs shared equally by both parties. The ultimate cost depends on how many hours are consumed and how long the case takes to come to a resolution.  However, the cost of a Private Judge is more than off-set by the cost-saving and other associated benefits.

Litigating contested cases in the Superior Court can be extremely expensive and very time consuming (which in turns lead to more expense).  Because of busy calendars and overrun dockets, a family law trial may actually occur over a series of days or half days spread out over weeks or months and possibly years. Nearly every attorney has experienced a trial that involves one day in May, another day in June and so on. With each interrupted day, additional costs are incurred through duplicative preparation, delays etc.

Even motion issues, which are disputed issues that are typically handled in under 30 minutes, are done more cost efficiently with Private Judges. In the Superior Court a motion involves substantial briefing back and forth in the 30 days prior to the hearing. On the day of the hearing, the parties may wait around for up to 2 hours or more to have their case heard.  Often the Court will run out of time and make them come back at a later date, or after 20 minutes of hearing, determine that more time is needed and make the parties come back for a second hearing. Even if the matter is heard that day, a decision may not be rendered for weeks or months given the heavy caseload that California Judges work under.

With a Private Judge, a time slot is reserved for your case. The matter is briefed in an agreed upon fashion and the briefs are fully reviewed. Often brief are shorter and less fact oriented as the Private Judge is typically very familiar with both the law and the facts. The hearing will take place at the scheduled time with little or no waiting around.  Private Judges can also engage in a teleconferences or informal hearings that often negate the need for formal hearings.

Time Savings and Other Benefits

Family Law Private Judges are typically former Family Law attorneys who are experts in the field of Family Law and are able to evaluate the facts of a case quickly and either resolve the dispute or craft out an equitable resolution.  That is not always the case with Superior Court Judges, who often move from department to department every few years (i.e. Criminal to Civil to Family).

While Superior Court Judges have extremely large case loads such that litigants often find their Judge does not remember all the details or history of their case (and may need to be repeatedly reminded of what happened previously), due to smaller case loads and more frequent case management, a Private Judge is almost always very familiar with the parties, the facts and the history and can get through the case quickly and can render decisions much sooner.

Many litigants who have been in both Superior Court and Private Judging also prefer the privacy and what some have called “more dignified” benefits in Private Judging. For example, few of the pleadings or letters ever find their way in the Superior Court file which is accessible to the public. In Superior Court cases almost everything ends up in the court file. It can also be less stressful and more calming and ultimately more “private” to have their case handled in a Private Judge’s office conference room rather than in Superior Court courtroom in from the entire courtroom staff, and tens if not hundreds of other litigants and spectators in the courtroom whom they don’t know.

If you have a family law matter and are interested in learning how using a Private Judge can assist you in resolving your issues, please contact the experienced Family Law attorneys at Lonich Patton Erlich Policastri for further information.  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.

https://www.lpeplaw.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/LPEP_PC.png 0 0 Mitchell Ehrlich https://www.lpeplaw.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/LPEP_PC.png Mitchell Ehrlich2011-05-04 15:01:002021-12-22 21:39:03Private Judging in Marital Dissolution Cases: Not Simply “For the Wealthy”

Delaying Divorce Due to Financial Circumstances

April 7, 2011/in Family Law /by David Patton

Recent economic pressures have impacted most individuals, including those wishing to file for divorce.  As economic conditions improve, a recent MSNBC article suggests that divorce filings are likely to rise as many were stalled due to economic realities. In highlighting this phenomenon, the article focuses on the Wesners, a couple who initially decided to divorce in 2008, but continually held back due to their financial circumstances.  At first Beverly Wesner decided that she would like to have a job before filing for divorce.  However, shortly after Beverly secured employment, her husband Dave suffered his own employment difficulties. While Beverley considered filing for divorce during this time period, she was afraid of having to pay spousal support to Dave.

In the meantime, Dave and Beverley have had to endure not really being married while definitely not being divorced.  During this time, the couple experimented with a living situation, called “bird nesting,” that is becoming more common in the current economic conditions. In this setup, the kids stay at the family home fulltime while the parents alternate between living in the family home and living in a rented apartment.  Eventually, Beverly contacted an attorney to move forward with their divorce after Dave found a job. While the Wesners and countless families across the country have struggled with divorce during difficult times, the article suggests that a growing number may soon be filing for divorce.

Locally, Lonich Patton Erlich Policastri has noticed the impact of the difficult economy with many individuals considering divorce holding back due to underwater property values, depressed 401k values and other economic hardships.  If you would like to learn more about divorce and the division of assets and debts or would like to discuss your options, please contact the San Jose Divorce 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.

 

https://www.lpeplaw.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/LPEP_PC.png 0 0 David Patton https://www.lpeplaw.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/LPEP_PC.png David Patton2011-04-07 11:29:092021-12-22 21:42:14Delaying Divorce Due to Financial Circumstances

Who Gets the Dog?! A Recent Case Sheds Light on Pet Custody

December 2, 2010/in Family Law /by Julia Lemon

What do you do if you cannot imagine parting with Fido, Fluffy, or Rover, but you know your soon-to-be ex-spouse feels exactly the same way?  A recent Maryland court decision dealing with pet custody addressed this very issue, and in a somewhat controversial move, awarded joint custody of the pet to both spouses. The spouses in this case both wanted custody of their beloved Shih Tzu mix, Lucky.  After the judge considered both sides’ arguments, he decided the only fair option would be to award both spouses custody of Lucky for 6 months of the year.

In California, domestic pets, such as dogs and cats, are generally considered property.  Thus, the approach taken by the Maryland court, which handled the pet custody issue in a method similar to child custody cases, is quite controversial.

In recent years, California has been more willing to protect pets throughout the divorce process.  In fact, the California Family Code allows a court to grant one spouse the exclusive care, possession, or control of a pet.  Likewise, a court can also order one spouse to stay away from a pet or refrain from taking, striking, harming or disposing of a beloved animal.

However, one of the main problems is that allowing a court the latitude to make such unique pet-custody rulings will result in further backlog an already congested court system.  However, this approach can reach more equitable and satisfying outcomes for ex-spouses.  For the full article, click here.

If you live in the Silicon Valley area and are concerned about what will happen to your beloved pet after your divorce, please contact the attorneys at Lonich Patton Erlich Policastri for more information.  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.

Thanks to Chau Law.

https://www.lpeplaw.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/LPEP_PC.png 0 0 Julia Lemon https://www.lpeplaw.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/LPEP_PC.png Julia Lemon2010-12-02 09:33:392021-12-22 21:59:29Who Gets the Dog?! A Recent Case Sheds Light on Pet Custody
Page 7 of 7«‹567
Learn more about estate planning with a free resource
Read all about family law and child custody
Learn more about family law matters such as private divorce counseling.

Categories

  • 2021
  • 2022
  • 2023
  • 2024
  • 2025
  • Business Law
  • Estate Planning
  • Family Law
  • Firm News
  • In the Community
  • News
  • Personal
  • Probate
  • Spotlight

Posts From The Past 12 Months

  • October 2025
  • September 2025
  • August 2025
  • July 2025
  • June 2025
  • May 2025
  • April 2025
  • March 2025
  • February 2025
  • January 2025
  • December 2024
  • November 2024

Explore Our Archives

Free 30-Minute Family Law or Estate Planning Consultation

3 + 0 = ?

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.

About | Why LPEP | Contact | Blog

© 2024 Lonich Patton Ehrlich Policastri. All rights reserved. Privacy Policy

Scroll to top

LPEP COVID-19 Office Protocol