Suffolk County

Published on: October 8, 2013

Appellant Seeks Modification of Child Support Obligations

by Stephen Bilkis

The instant case arises from an award of child support entered after an inquest, upon the appellant’s default in appearing at the hearing. A New York Family Lawyer said the appellant alleges he became sick immediately prior to the commencement of a support hearing in February 1990 and asked his wife’s attorney to inform the court that he went home ill. Instead, his wife’s attorney only informed the court that he was present, but had left. Thus, the wife was the sole witness at the inquest, and, based upon her testimony, the Hearing Examiner, in an order, awarded child support and maintenance. The appellant sporadically paid only a small fraction of the support ordered by the court.

A New York Custody Lawyer said that the appellant further alleges that from the time of the support proceedings until April 1991 he either lacked counsel or that the counsel which represented him did not provide him with effective assistance of counsel. The appellant then engaged his present counsel who moved by order to show cause to vacate his default pursuant to CPLR 5015. The motion was denied by Hearing Examiner in an order and objections to the Hearing Examiner’s order were denied in the order appealed from.

The appellant sought modification of his support obligations pursuant to Family Court Act § 415. Hearing Examiner Silverman ordered a combined hearing on the issues of downward modification and whether the appellant had willfully violated the support order.

Published on: September 23, 2013

Court Decides on Case Involving Laches

by Stephen Bilkis

This Family Court Article 5 paternity proceeding was commenced by the Suffolk County Department of Social Services on behalf of petitioner against respondent. A Suffolk Family Lawyer said that, the trial was commenced and concluded on June 2, 1981. A New York Family Lawyer said at the outset, the respondent orally raised two defenses, to wit: that the petition should be dismissed because of the petitioner’s laches and that such dismissal was in the best interest of the child. A Suffolk Child Support Lawyer said that, these defenses were denied for the reasons set forth on the record. Upon the completion of testimony, the respondent requested, was granted permission and submitted a Post Trial Memorandum which re-raised the identical defenses alluded to heretofore. The County Attorney offered no further submission but relied on the points raised at trial.

A New York Custody Lawyer said the issue in this case is whether the petition should be dismissed because of the petitioner’s laches and that such dismissal was in the best interest of the child.

The court said that it will reconsider the defenses first. With respect to respondent’s contention that the instant proceeding must be dismissed due to the existence of laches attributable to the petitioner, the interposing of such a defense does not lie in an action brought pursuant to Article 5 of the Family Court Act. While the inexcusable failure to promptly assert a claim may, at times, operates as a bar to relief, such failure constitutes a barrier only in equitable actions. It is a time honored legal maxim that the doctrine of laches is one peculiar to actions in equity; laches does not operate to bar actions at law that are commenced within the applicable limitation period. A paternity proceeding, unknown at common law, is a creature of statute and clearly an action at law therefore, it cannot be affected by laches. The action is either timely or untimely pursuant to statute.

Published on: January 6, 2013

Defendant Contends He Received an Unfair Trial

by Stephen Bilkis

Upon the notice of motion dated July 2, 2010, defendant moves via his attorney for an order pursuant to Criminal Procedure Law (CPL) sections 440.10(1)(H) and 440.20 to vacate the within conviction and to have his sentence therewith set aside. A New York Family Lawyer said defendant argues that his conviction should be vacated and the sentence set aside because of ineffective assistance of counsel, in that, although alibi notice was served and on notice with the court, trial counsel failed to present defendant’s alibi defense and did not call alibi witnesses whose testimony would have exculpated defendant from the within conviction. A hearing on this matter was granted without objection from counsel and held on October 28, 2010. The hearing was continued on December 16, 2010 with oral argument of counsel.

On February 3, 1993 at approximately 8:45 pm at 1033 Broadway in Kings County, the defendant along with three companions was alleged to have robbed four persons inside a pool hall located at that address. A New York Custody Lawyer said the defendant was said to be armed and in the course of the robbery shot two persons one died and the other was wounded, an eyewitness. Eyewitnesses identified the defendant out of a line-up and photo array as one of the people who committed the crimes. Defendant was charged with Murder in the Second Degree, Attempted Murder in the Second Degree, Robbery in the First Degree, and two counts of Criminal Possession of a Weapon.

A Suffolk County Family Lawyer said that, alibi notice had been presented in this matter by defendant’s former Legal Aid attorney which offered the defense that defendant could not have committed the acts he is charged with because at the time of the commission of said crimes defendant was eighteen blocks away at 1217 Jefferson Avenue in Kings County, his family home. Defendant had intended to call the two tenants who live at 1217 Jefferson Avenue. The alibi notice dated April 12, 1993 is addended to defendant’s motion as exhibit A.

Published on: April 8, 2012

Court Hears Child Support Case

by Stephen Bilkis

Frances Bill is the respondent in this case where Gerald Bill was the appellant.

Summary

The Child Support Standards Act is the standard method used to determine child support payments based on the parents income. One of the issues included in the act is that the costs of child care are to be shared by parents in proportion to their earnings, and whether those terms can be enforced when the parties are unaware of the terms of the CSSA. The court ended up agreeing with the Family Court which ordered the father in the case to pay a percentage of the child care expenses encountered by the mother.

Published on: February 1, 2012

Court Rules on Visitation where Substance Abuse is a Factor

by Stephen Bilkis

When families break down, it is the children who suffer so much. When they start growing up in an environment that is unresolved, they also tend to create chaotic environments on their own. If we care for the future generations of this country, then it is important that we help each other out in informing families on how it is really to raise one. You would learn a lot of values and rights when you get to review some child visitation rights cases explored by a credible New York Family Lawyer.

This case was between the Department of Children and Families versus a mother who is not capable of taking care of her own son. The mother was hidden in the initials of B.M. The child is a four-year-old boy with the initials of B.B. He was brought to the DCF for a shelter petition last 2006. It all started with the mother and child deciding to live alone away from the father who mistreats and abused his wife. In September 12 of 2006, she left her son in a neighbor’s house and promised that she would return soon. But she did not and only came back for her son the afternoon of the next day.

Because of this non-compliance according to a New York Visitation Lawyer she was evicted two days after and she even evaded possible confrontation with the WID. A history of violence in the home was traced and both parents had restraining orders. By September 18, the mother was allowed visitation that is supervised about two times in a week. But on the following month, reports say that she has already missed three appointed visits with which she gave three unreasonable excuses as well. First, she simply overslept. Second, she had to go to a particular doctor’s appointment. Third, she needed to do another follow up with her doctor.

Published on: November 12, 2011

More Couples Divorcing as Recession Eases

by Stephen Bilkis

There has been an increase in the number of divorce cases in recent months. One possible reason for this happening is because of the recession becoming much less serious. It’s thought that several people who were in troubled marriages simply waited until the financial crises have eased slightly. People start to feel more comfortable in their abilities and future and so will start divorcing.

A previous employee of Disney World decided that it was the right time for her to divorce, and leave her partner. She explained to a Suffolk County Divorce Lawyer that she had been in a troubled marriage for several years before deciding to leave.

It has been explained that during the real estate boom a couple of years ago, her husband took some of the equity from their home to buy apartment units. The apartment units were bought through the spouses name to benefit from a better credit rating, it was explained. However, due to the financial crisis many of these apartments remained empty. This meant that unpaid rent notices and loan payments were quickly becoming out of control. The couple had no choice other than declare bankruptcy.

Published on: October 25, 2011

Robin Givens and Mike Tyson had an interesting divorce

by Stephen Bilkis

Robin Givens and Mike Tyson are matched against each other in a fight which is bound to end up in a Knockout… probably with Tyson taking the blows and winding up on the canvas.

With visitation and child custody in the balance, you should hire a New York Family Lawyer when confronted by a divorce. An attorney with knowledge and experience is your best way to achieve the goals you need to reach in these troubled waters..

After months of fighting and slinging claims back and forth, they both filed for divorce. Tyson countersued Givens after she filed in court. She claimed that he beat her and made her life unbearable while he blamed the mother-in-law, Ruth Roper for many of the problems. He says that Roper lied to him about Robin being pregnant to force him into marriage. He also said that both his wife and her mother had tried to keep him away from his old friends in Manhattan and Suffolk County, particularly his Black friends.

Published on: August 29, 2011

Mills a ‘Gold Digger

by Stephen Bilkis

Michele Elyzabeth claims that Heather Mills for whom she once worked is a liar and has misled her and everybody else on the planet as far as what kind of person Mills is. This comes a few weeks after Michele stopped doing publicity for the former wife of Beatle Paul McCartney.

Elyzabeth says that false stories about McCartney were leaked by Mills and that she even has Paul’s phone bugged. She recorded conversations and played them for the then publicist. One of the recordings was between McCartney and his daughter. Mills wore gloves so that her finger prints would not show up.

In the tapped phone conversation with his daughter, Stella, Paul complains that Mills is driving him nuts with her craziness. Elyzabeth comes to the conclusion that Mills was in this for the money alone. The gold digger came out on top as she was given a 50 million dollar settlement back In March when the divorce was granted. NY Family Lawyers in Nassau and Suffolk Counties have taken note of this particular case and are aware of the outcome.

Published on: July 17, 2011

Missing boy found after a two-month search

by Stephen Bilkis

An 11-year-old boy, who had been missing for two months according to his mother, was finally found with his father after a long search by authorities.

A N York Family Attorney said the boy had been visiting his father on his usual weekend when his father took him for fear of being arrested. The mother and father have had joint custody since their divorce a year ago.

The New York Family Lawyer went on to explain the man had allegedly not been following all of his divorce stipulations. On the weekend he had his son, he learned there was a warrant out for his arrest. The man reportedly sped away in his car with the boy when he saw a deputy nearby.

Published on: February 25, 2011

Popular Nip/Tuck Star Files for Divorce

by Stephen Bilkis

Dylan Walsh, uber sexy star of the FX hit series Nip/Tuck, has chosen to have a lifestyle makeover of his own and has filed for divorce from his wife of six years, according to reports from a New York Family Lawyer. Yet another Hollywood romance left in pieces.

Walsh, a youthful 47, is best known for his role as Dr. Sean McNamara, an emotive plastic surgeon on the FX series Nip/Tuck who is notoriously good at fixing what people don’t like about themselves but runs into a host of ways that his own life is broken in the process. Walsh is an American who has also acted in dozens of movie and television performances, including Soldier Boy and Kate & Allie.

Walsh cited the commonly muttered justification of irreconcilable differences with his wife of six years, actress Joanna Going, who is best known for her many roles in made- for-television movies and who is also to star with actor Sean Penn in the upcoming movie release The Tree of Life.