Child Support And Custody

Child custody is often an aftereffect of divorce and is often part andparcel of divorce law. Accordingly, the court which has jurisdictionover a divorce proceeding also has jurisdiction over child custody disputes. Child custody disputes, however, do not just arise whenmarried parents seek divorce. Child custody disputes also arise when(i) unmarried parents cannot agree as to who will take responsiblefor their minor child, (ii) a parent or a legal guardian is found tobe incapable of providing for and making decisions for the minorchild, or (iii) when the parent or both parents or legal guardian isdeceased. Child custody is also not just limited to biological oradoptive parents, but can also be awarded to family members, fosterparents or an institution.

In the case of married couples, under common statutory provisions,parents have joint guardianship over their minor child, their parental rights are equal, and, when they separate, parents retaintheir equal right to the custody of the child. In all cases of childcustody, the courts' foremost consideration is the child's "bestinterests." This means, courts must take into consideration, foremost, the child's wishes, the parents' wishes, the child's relationship with the parents, guardian, or siblings, and the child's education, welfare, and health.

State laws generally govern child custody cases. The general rule is that child custody should be awarded to a parent rather than a non-parent.The presumption of law in child custody differs from one state to another, however, most states presume that both parents should have joint custody over their minor child.

There are different types of custody that the courts can choose from. In the case of married parents, while divorce or separation proceedings are ongoing, the court may grant temporary custody to an individual. Following divorce proceedings, the court may grant joint custody where both parents enjoy equal rights in rearing their minor child if the court finds that both parents are capable of responsibly providing for the child.

The court may also grant exclusive custody to one parent and grant theother parent non-custodial rights. In exclusive custody, the non-custodial parent may be awarded supervision rights and visitation rights. Seeking exclusive custody of a child is common in divorce proceedings. The parent suing for exclusive child custody must overthrow the presumption that joint custody is in the best interest of the child. In cases where the marriage produced multiple children,courts can award each parent custody to a particular child in accordance with the best interests of the specific child. In instances where both parents are unfit, or when both parents are deceased, the court may award custody to a grandparent or a closerelative.

One of the issues that would arise in child custody cases is when the custodial parent seeks to deny the non-custodial parent visitation rights or when the non-custodial parent, having been denied ofvisitation rights, attempts to violate the court's decree.

Determining who has custody over a child will involve complex andemotionally-draining litigation. Child custody cases, in streetspeak, are often referred to as "battles," and battles the yare. Expert child custody attorneys help parents and guardians protect their rights and that of their child's and win the battle the least heartbreaking way.

Areas of Law

Defamation Law - Legal Information and Resources

Defamation Law

Freedom of speech is a personal right granted to all individuals as enshrined by the Constitution. Freedom of speech, however, is not absolute. Freedom of speech is limited when that freedom encroaches on another individual's freedom. Defamation -- the act of creating false statements about a person and communicating those statements to another person, causing harm to the subject's reputation and standing in the community.

Defamation is governed primarily by state law. Although the Constitution and case precedents interpreting freedom of speech also form a crucial part of defamation law. While state law differs as to the specific acts that constitute defamation, the types of harm caused by such act, and the penalties that accompany such act, the general elements that must be proved are basically similar.

Defamation is called libel, when the defamatory statements are printed, written, or broadcasted, and called slander when the defamatory statements are communicated orally. While defamation per se is not difficult to prove as the statements are so vicious the harm is obvious, libel and slander may not be as easy to prove. For one, proving that the false statements were communicated as fact, rather than opinion, is difficult, the aggrieved party would need a lawyer who specializes in these types of cases. Moreover, proving intent and damages require extrinsic evidence that may be difficult to obtain, especially when freedom of speech is taken into consideration. Malice, for one, is difficult to prove as the aggrieved party need to produce clear and convincing evidence that the person who communicated the false statement knew beforehand that the statement was false.

In addition to proving defamation, intent, and harm, one of the more difficult tasks for defamation attorneys is countering the defense's possible argument that the false statement is not defamatory. Typical defense for defamation would be that the statement was an opinion based on accurate facts, minor reporting errors, and the statement was the truth. The U.S. Supreme Court has, in many cases, ruled that government officials, political candidates, heroes, and celebrities are generally exempted from filing defamation cases with respect to their status as public figures, except when malice or intent is proven.

The harm, which include being shamed, hated, or belittled, caused by the defamatory statements gives rise to damages. Most states would require that the damaged party demand a printed retraction of the defamatory statement before proceeding to filing a case in court. If the damaged party decides to sue without first seeking retraction or if the damaged party receives a retraction but proceeds to sue anyway, most states will limit the damages the damaged party may pursue to the actual or special damages they experienced, such as loss of employment or wages. If it is proven that the person who made the false statements acted with intentional malice, then the aggrieved party will be entitled to additional damages, including damages for loss of business. It is thus wise for the damaged party to seek advice from counsel before making any step towards seeking restitution, as making one wrong move could lessen the damages that is due the aggrieved party.

Areas of Law