Editor's Note: Nancy Erickson, an attorney with Legal Services for New York City, in Brooklyn, spoke to New York's Matrimonial Commission in October. Here, she recaps the substance of that testimony.
Several years ago, when I was working in a national legal services office that did research, consultations, and training in family law, it came to my attention that in custody cases involving domestic violence, custody was often being awarded to the abuser. Then, when I started actually representing low-income individuals in divorce and other family law cases, I got several battered women clients who had lost custody to their abusers. After investigation, it became apparent that the reason they lost custody was that the court-appointed child custody evaluators had recommended custody to the abusers, and the courts followed the recommendations. The forensic evaluators seemed to know little about domestic violence, and they paid virtually no attention to it when they conducted their evaluations. For example, some evaluators held joint meetings with the battered woman and her abuser, which further traumatized the woman. Many evaluators misdiagnosed battered women as having serious psychopathology, when the women were simply showing symptoms of the trauma they suffered at the hands of their abusers.
Editor's Note: Nancy Erickson, an attorney with Legal Services for New York City, in Brooklyn, spoke to New York's Matrimonial Commission in October. Here, she recaps the substance of that testimony.
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN LawJournalNewsletters
Already have an account? Sign In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate access, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or call 1-877-256-2473.
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2026 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
The combination of increasing operating costs and uncertain government reimbursement funding continues to place health care providers under financial pressure, and in many cases, financial distress. Given the importance of Medicare/Medicaid funding of claims under provider agreements with the federal government, how courts interpret and apply the interplay between the Bankruptcy Code and Medicare Program Act determines the disposition of hundreds of millions of dollars of claims for reimbursement that support the health care system.
As AI becomes embedded in everyday business and legal operations, organizations are confronting a new expectation: simply disclosing AI use is no longer enough. A critical shift is taking place in the legal industry: transparency is no longer just about disclosure; it’s about comprehension.
Clients have pushed back on what they are willing to pay for since long before anyone heard of a large language model. AI is the latest chapter in a long story about legal fees. But it introduces a wrinkle that prior tools did not.
If you want sustainable revenue growth, you cannot treat rainmaking as a personality trait. You must treat it as a professional discipline — one that is intentionally developed through structured partner development based on a proven framework.
Patents are not static assets. They are legal instruments shaped over time by prosecution, continuation practice, post‑grant proceedings, and cross‑border filings. Treating them as fixed objects in a fixed landscape misstates the risk.