LJN Newsletters

Cozen O'Connor to Acquire Most of Fischbein Badillo's Lawyers

As I work with partners in law firms throughout the country, I continue to be surprised at how little, if any, formal training they have had in the business of law ' leadership, management, profitability, and business development.
Lawyers are largely extremely bright and talented people. Most, however, do not have MBAs, did not study business in college and do not devote sufficient non-billable time each year to ongoing leadership and management training courses.

Recent rulings of importance to you and your practice.

Timely and accurate knowledge of all the relevant facts is essential to successful matrimonial litigation. The proper use of the Internet helps give litigants access to relevant information; the Internet has been recognized by matrimonial attorneys as promoting a variety of goals: identification and substantiation of claims and defenses; discovery of data that permits the parties to evaluate their respective positions better; the simplification and narrowing of issues; and assistance in the conduct of the trial.

Can the subject matter jurisdiction of a family court extend beyond divorce and annulment into the broader realm of dissolution of the family? Does a family court have equity jurisdiction to dissolve a Vermont civil union and to adjudicate the division of property and ancillary economic claims? Does an out-of-state family court have jurisdiction to dissolve a Vermont civil union based on its power to enforce contracts and to adjudicate contractual disputes, including express or implied contracts between unmarried cohabitants? How does a state's version of the Defense of Marriage Act (referred to as a mini or junior-DOMA) factor into this analysis, if at all? Family lawyers are closely monitoring an emerging body of case law that seeks to answer some of these questions. In all likelihood, at some point in 2005, a state's highest court will weigh in on these issues, and that decision may potentially affect the degree to which family lawyers will succeed in securing out-of-state decrees on behalf of clients seeking to dissolve Vermont civil unions.

New York has recently been exposed to a resurgence of doubt regarding the usefulness of evaluations performed by mental health professionals (MHPs) in custody matters. In debates certain to affect the national family law community, the criticism questions the scientific validity of recommendations and observations that these professionals are called upon to make, asking whether the experts, in fact, have the expertise to participate meaningfully in the process. This article responds to some of the criticism by seeking to clarify the role that MHPs play.

Because the custody evaluator comes to court as an expert witness, he or she may be impeached by the published writings of other professionals in his or her field. People v. Feldman, 299 NY 153, 85 NE2d 913 (1949). Once a proper foundation is laid, passages that contradict the testimony may be read and the witness asked whether he or she agrees or disagrees with those statements. When used in such fashion, the content of the statement put to the witness does not become evidence in the case, but is allowed only to discredit or weaken his or her testimony by showing that learned writers in the field have expressed contrary views. This article uses New York rules of procedure to explore the evidentiary doctrine and trial techniques pertaining to impeachment by treatise when confronting the testimony of a custody evaluator.

Recent developments of note in the Internet industry. This month:
CA Judge Orders Online Reporters to Reveal Sources in Apple Computer Case
Hollywood Studios File New Round of Web Lawsuits
British Court Forces ISPs to Reveal Music Sharers
Movie Downloading Judged Legal in France
eBay Loses Patent Case; Injunction May Follow