I knew the title of this piece would catch your attention. No I am not self-eulogizing, just wanted to share with you all the attitude I have seen in some of the less rational family law litigants. Many of them simply will not budge when it comes to the minutest concessions to there soon to be ex-spouse, adopting the rigid 'over my dead body' approach. In fact, many of them will select an attorney strictly on the basis of who is more likely to fight, fight, fight, regardless of how irrational the position is being taken. They judge their attorney candidates based on naive assumptions that he or she will fight it out until the bitter end, giving no quarter. Well folks, family law proceedings are not analogous to arm wrestling championships. When all the dust has settled, there has to be rationality to the position you are taking and equally important, the court needs to feel that you are not the cause of the problems by your inflexible rigidity.
It is often said about family law hearings (take Orders to Show Cause for example) that no one wins every issue, nor do they lose every issue. Quite frankly, that makes sense. After all, the family law court is a court of equity, which means, a court of fairness. Many times the judge who has been particularly hard on one party at the prior hearing appears to go easier on that party at the next hearing. While that rule of thumb is not always the case (such in instances where you have been so irritating, uncooperative, or committed such heinous acts that it is all the judge can do to not telegraph his disdain for you), it generally rings true. Remember, these judges hear thousands of these cases each year. They have heard every story out there. They are so familiar with your script of "I am an Angel and My Ex, the Devil" that little you can say on that account is going to cause them to deviate from the general notion that the truth lies somewhere in between.
The above principles are particularly important in cases of domestic violence where the stakes are quite high and the court knows that it is not out of the realm of possibility that someone may have alleged domestic violence charges on their ex as a means of hopefully gaining more child support, child custody and spousal support. This is a dangerous game to play, and imagine how the judge will perceive you if it turns out that it was a trumped up claim of domestic violence where none really existed. Now, none of this is to suggest that there are not serious examples of brutal inhumane domestic violence. However, recognize that before you blindly push that as an issue, remember that your ex will also fight, and you will have to go through long and arduous hearings. Those hearings can be quite grueling, not to mention expensive.
While I do not mean to harp on the DV case, I do want to get back to the title of this piece, "Over My Dead Body". It is always amazing to me when people utter those four dreaded words when their attorney or even the court asks them to make a concession. I got news for you folks, while judges do a wonderful job of displaying impartiality and remaining poker faced when all others in the court room are either rolling their eyes or falling asleep, they do offer hints as to where they are leaning on an issue and do make suggestions. They do not take too kindly to those who disregard their sage pearls of wisdom, and being human, may take that into account come time for decision. I know that you are all thinking, "gees is he suggesting that we cave in at all times?" Well, no he is not. What I am suggesting is that you would be well advised to pick and choose your battles. It is likely not every issue will be decided in your favor, therefore, have in your mind points/positions that you are willing to concede and those that you wish to fight. The court will take stock of you as a person, pass judgment on your reasonableness (or lack thereof) and that may factor in on 'close call' issues wherein you want the benefit of the doubt.
Remember, clever attorneys may let it be known to the court (particularly when it comes down to the time of assigning responsibility for attorney fees) that this entire four or five day hearing was over a minute detail, a detail that the court may find petty, and inconsequential to the big picture issues. Judges are human, how do you expect they will feel having to listen to the parties and their attorneys drone on for hour after hour, knowing that just a little give and take would have solved the problem. I can tell you, they will not be amused. A judge who had an affable disposition at the start of the proceedings who has now turned sour is probably that way because the parties and their silly battle of wills has angered him. One thing for certain, an angry judge is not what you want and the transformation is most assuredly something for which you do not want to be rightly saddled with blame. Furthermore, while allocation of attorney fee responsibility is typically judged by who has the better ability to pay, that is not always the case. If the court determines that the massive five day trial over who gets an extra four to six hours a week of child custody, the living room furniture and the pet cat snuggles, was on your shoulders, even if you are not the higher earner and not in the best position to pay fees, you may find that your attorney's request for fees from the other side is denied. Worse still, you could be assessed a portion, if not all, of the other side's fees.
Moral of the story, use common sense. Like a hat and coat at a fine restaurant, check in your 'over my dead body' approach at the front door. If you need the assistance of an attorney, the Glendale Divorce Attorneys at Dabbah & Haddad, APC are here for you. Please contact us or submit a case evaluation form, and we will contact you.
The information on this website is for general information purposes only. Nothing on this site should be taken as legal advice for any individual case or situation. This information is not intended to create, and receipt or viewing does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship.
