Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.

The Matrimonial StrategistKickerFeaturesSectionsNewsLJN Newsletters

2004 Update: Negative Custody Evaluations and Guardian Ad Litem Reports

By Joseph P. Bluth
February 01, 2004

In the August 2003 issue of The Matrimonial Strategist, I discussed identifying and exacting information from your client that would motivate a Guardian Ad Litem (GAL) or Custody Evaluator (CE) to examine the real issues in the case and not let bias interfere with his or her assessment. (In the remainder of this article, the GAL/CE is designated female and the client male.) The article made suggestions about interviewing your client, identifying issues, and reviewing records such as those from previous court matters or medical treatment.

The ultimate goal is to have the court appreciate your client's perspective on the issues that must be taken into consideration when deciding the issue of custody, especially if the GAL/CE's opinion has failed to do so. It is essential, then, that your client understands the GAL/CE is not going to conduct her examination the same way the judge or a lawyer would. It is important to explain to your client that the GAL/CE takes an “inference-based” approach to conducting an assessment, so that the client understands how he can best address the issue of the other parent's deficits and inappropriate parenting practices when speaking to the GAL/CE, and more importantly, to any collateral sources who may be contacted. Such sources include health care providers, day care workers, teachers, and so forth. Ultimately, the groundwork you lay with the client will resonate through to the professionals involved with your case, as the GAL/CE gathers “history” in a way that emphasizes patterns, not just events.

This premium content is locked for LJN Newsletters subscribers only

  • 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

For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473

Read These Next
The DOJ's Corporate Enforcement Policy: One Year Later Image

The DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.

The DOJ's New Parameters for Evaluating Corporate Compliance Programs Image

The parameters set forth in the DOJ's memorandum have implications not only for the government's evaluation of compliance programs in the context of criminal charging decisions, but also for how defense counsel structure their conference-room advocacy seeking declinations or lesser sanctions in both criminal and civil investigations.

Use of Deferred Prosecution Agreements In White Collar Investigations Image

This article discusses the practical and policy reasons for the use of DPAs and NPAs in white-collar criminal investigations, and considers the NDAA's new reporting provision and its relationship with other efforts to enhance transparency in DOJ decision-making.

Bankruptcy Sales: Finding a Diamond In the Rough Image

There is no efficient market for the sale of bankruptcy assets. Inefficient markets yield a transactional drag, potentially dampening the ability of debtors and trustees to maximize value for creditors. This article identifies ways in which investors may more easily discover bankruptcy asset sales.

Compliance Officers: Recent Regulatory Guidance and Enforcement Actions and Mitigating the Risk of Personal Liability Image

This article explores legal developments over the past year that may impact compliance officer personal liability.