I recently read a post entitled "Why 'Fair' is the F-Word in Divorce Negotiations"  by Shawn Weber, which posits that fairness, as a subjective concept, bogs people down and can keep them from reaching agreements.  I agree with Mr. Weber that the focus of divorce negotiation should be "on making a decision that can end the conflict so that a person can move on, which in turn will bring peace."   However, I also believe that sometimes understanding the concept of "what is fair" to a person is integral to a couple finding peace. Mr. Weber rightly points out that asking the question "what is fair" will often result in two answers that do not intersect.  Consider, for example, a hypothetical couple fighting over whether the children are ready to meet the mother's new boyfriend.  The mother may think it's unfair for her not to have the choice of when is the right time to make that introduction, and the father may think it's unfai...

A number of recent appellate decisions in Massachusetts have addressed the boundaries of what Probate and Family Court trial judges have the power to do.  Agreements reached between the parties, however, can include provisions that the judges don't otherwise have the authority to order.   In this four part blog series we will explore some of the important areas that an Agreement can address but the trial court is limited in addressing.  These are just some of  the most recent examples, and not intended to be an exhaustive list of all the ways that Agreements are better than  letting a Judge decide your fate . Part 4:  Parent Coordinator:  Do you want help resolving parenting disputes without returning to court? In Part 1 , we discussed how the Appeals Court in Ventrice overturned a lower court's order that required parties to engage in out-of-court mediation prior to filing any further action in the Probate and Family Court.   While Parent...

A number of recent appellate decisions in Massachusetts have addressed the boundaries of what Probate and Family Court trial judges have the power to do.  Agreements reached between the parties, however, can include provisions that the judges don't otherwise have the authority to order.   In this four part blog series we will explore some of the important areas that an Agreement can address but the trial court is limited in addressing.  These are just some of  the most recent examples, and not intended to be an exhaustive list of all the ways that Agreements are better than  letting a Judge decide your fate . Part 3: Survived Agreements:  Do you want to decide now that certain issues can never return to court? The issue of survived v. merged agreements can often be a confusing one, but it is actually relatively simple:  Merged agreements can be changed in the future by a Court, and survived agreements can NOT be changed in the future by a C...

A number of recent appellate decisions in Massachusetts have addressed the boundaries of what Probate and Family Court trial judges have the power to do.  Agreements reached between the parties, however, can include provisions that the judges don't otherwise have the authority to order.   In this four part blog series we will explore some of the important areas that an Agreement can address but the trial court is limited in addressing.  These are just some of  the most recent examples, and not intended to be an exhaustive list of all the ways that Agreements are better than letting a Judge decide your fate . Part 2: Self-Executing Adjustments - Do you want to return to court for changes you can anticipate? On March 18, 2015, Doris Tennant and Lisa Smith presented to the Massachusetts Council on Family Mediation on the issue of Self-Modifying agreements, also known as self-executing provisions.  The program was an excellent overview of the recent case law...

A number of recent appellate decisions in Massachusetts have addressed the boundaries of what Probate and Family Court trial judges have the power to do.  Their powers are limited by statute, case law and the Massachusetts Constitution, and sometimes judges exceed those powers by crafting solutions that test the boundaries of their authority. These limitations, however, highlight one of the reasons that more and more people are seeking out-of-court methods of resolving their family conflict.  Agreements reached between the parties can include provisions that the judges don't otherwise have the authority to order.   In this four part blog series we will explore some of the important areas that an Agreement can address but the trial court is limited in addressing.  These are just some of  the most recent examples, and not intended to be an exhaustive list of all the ways that Agreements are better than letting a Judge decide your fate . Part 1:  Future Di...

"Let the Judge Decide!"   How often have I heard that in my career as a divorce attorney and mediator?  Too many times to count. In many cases, when a spouse or their attorney feels that they are unable to reach an agreement with the other side, they simply decide to put the issue to the Judge.  After all, that's the Judge's job.  The whole reason we have a civil legal system is to resolve disputes in a civilized way between adults, but that system is far from perfect. Have you really been told the truth about what it means to "let the Judge decide?" The Probate and Family Court as a division of the trial court is an (almost) free service available to all members of the public over whom they have jurisdiction.  They will not provide you with a free attorney in most cases, but there are free law libraries throughout the state, and the court will provide you with the necessary forms and an interpreter if you have the need.  If you have a civil dispu...

When presenting at a Motion for Temporary Orders, Restraining Order, Motion to Vacate, or similar hearing the Court will typically hear argument from parties or counsel without a full evidentiary hearing. This means that the Judge will make a decision that could significantly affect your life after having only 10-15 minutes to learn what is going on. I tell clients to pay attention to everything the Judge does during that hearing to get a clue as to what the Judge might be thinking and how they might rule. When they are looking at you, when they are writing, and what questions they ask, are all clues as to what is important to the Judge. Similarly, the Judge is watching everything you do during that hearing. Since the Judge only has 10-15 minutes to assess your credibility as a witness everything you are doing matters as well. Judges are not just listening to what you say, but how you say it. In addition, the way you react to the allegations of the other party can be crucial ...

One Judge in Canada may have gone too far in admitting what he really thinks. A recent Time article highlights the lengthy decision of a family-court Judge in Ontario who called out a particularly vindictive couple for their abhorrent behavior. Although the decision was probably well-deserved the Judge may have let his frustration with the couple distract from the typical judicial demeanor. Just because other Judges don't typically write decisions so bluntly, doesn't mean they don't have the same thoughts about some of their cases. In fact, having been involved in a number of cases which included unnecessarily petty behavior by the litigants I am sure the Judges in those instances wished they could write a decision like this. If common sense doesn't make you stop your vindictive or angry responses in a divorce case, then at least try to remember that the Judge will hear about this behavior and it can only hurt your chances of convincing the Judge of the merits...