Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Analyzing Child Custody Reports
This article is the first installment of a four-part series offering a model for attorneys to use when faced with the task of deconstructing a forensic custody assessment. Family law attorneys are familiar with that difficult moment when a child custody evaluation (CCE) by a mental health professional arrives at the courthouse with a “Conclusions” section that drops like a bomb on their client's case, suggesting that all may be lost. In other cases, a report's conclusions could not be more wonderful for their client, but it becomes apparent that the assessment was so poorly done that it will be easily dismantled on cross-examination. Either circumstance requires a thorough analysis of the forensic work-product to determine how to counsel the parent-litigant about the next step in his or her case.
A small body of literature suggests some of the areas most important to consider when analyzing a child custody report. It includes articles by Austin, Kirkpatrick, & Flens, (2011, Family Court Review' and by Gould, Kirkpatrick, Austin, & Martindale (2004, J Child Custody). More recently, the Custody Assessment Analysis System, or CAAS, provided a comprehensive system for the pre-trial analysis of CCEs by attorneys (Wittmann, 2013, MatLaw Corp.). The CAAS is grounded in the published parameters and guidelines of the forensic field, key forensic and psychological treatises, and research on clinical judgment. The inspection of an evaluator's report, focusing on the factors outlined below, produces a “red-flag” analysis: a catalog of deficiencies or threats to reliability that appear to characterize a particular assessment.
Simultaneous attention to the strengths in a particular report can also be quite instructive, by revealing ways in which it may be sturdy and unlikely to yield under attack. The CAAS model suggests four broad dimensions or lenses for such an analysis, dimensions that will structure the discussion in our four installments: Management of Professional Relationships, Data Adequacy, Technique Adequacy, and Reasoning Adequacy. The first of these dimensions is the focus of this installment.
This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
- Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
- Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
- Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
The Article 8 Opt In
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
Legal Possession: What Does It Mean?
Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.
Removing Restrictive Covenants In New York
In Rockwell v. Despart, the New York Supreme Court, Third Department, recently revisited a recurring question: When may a landowner seek judicial removal of a covenant restricting use of her land?