Domestic Relations: On the Run

Sponsored with the Masschusetts Chapter of the American Academy
of Matrimonial Lawyers

Date: Friday, April 28, 2006

Location: Suffolk University Law School, 120 Tremont St., Boston, MA
Time: 09:00 AM - 05:00 PM

Complex legal issues arise when a custodial parent seeks to relocate with his or her child to another state or country or to a distant location within Massachusetts. In 2003, the Massachusetts Appeals Court held that removing children to a distant part of the state may be analogous to interstate relocation and may require a court order authorizing the move. A lawyer counseling a client in a divorce or child custody proceeding must understand the removal standards set forth in M.G. L. c. 208, § 30, the significance of provisions in a custody agreement, and recent developments in Massachusetts case law. This course provides you with a framework for dealing with relocation issues by examining real cases in depth and presenting a mock proceeding in which the claims of the parties are presented and played out. Four of the best family law attorneys in Massachusetts will present the mock trial and participate in the strategy discussions. Learn answers to difficult questions concerning when relocation will be authorized under the § 30 standard, “upon cause shown.” Find out how the court assesses the best interests of the child and determines that there is a “real advantage” to the moving parent.

ABOUT THE CASE

The judgment of divorce provided joint legal custody and shared physical custody. Both parties live within 1 mile of each other, in Lexington. Each parent has alternate weeks with the children. The children attend public schools in Lexington. Next year Sean will be attending the 1st grade, and Ruth will be starting the 7th grade.

The parents were optimistic that co-parenting would work well. However, significant disputes concerning discipline and parents’ lifestyle choices have arisen. Mother’s fiancé resides in Lenox, MA. She filed a Complaint for Modification, in which she seeks removal of the children to Lenox, an increase in child support, change of the parenting schedule and the appointment of a GAL.

The Father objects to Mother’s request for removal and filed a Cross Complaint for Modification and seeks primary physical and legal custody of both children, elimination of child support payments to the Mother, and an adjustment in the parenting schedule. Motions for temporary orders seeking temporary removal and increased child support were denied. A GAL was appointed to investigate custody, removal claims, and parenting issues. The Father has filed Answers to Expert Interrogatories disclosing that he has engaged an expert to testify in favor of the Lexington School System for these children.

• How to deal with the nuances and complexities of relocation cases
• Trial strategies which you can immediately implement
• What constitutes “best interest” for relocation
• How to raise a Daubert objection to an expert witness
• How to conduct effective direct and cross examinations

PLANNING COMMITTEE

Honorable Edward M. Ginsburg (ret.)
Senior Partners for Justice, VLP, Boston, MA

Rudolf A. Jaworski, Esq.
RA Jaworski PC, Danvers, MA, President-Elect, Mass. Chapter of American Academy of
Matrimonial Lawyers

Ronald A. Witmer, Esq.
Witmer, Karp, Warner & Ryan, LLP, Boston, MA

COURSE FACULTY

Robin M. Deutsch, Ph.D.
Director of Forensic Services Children and The Law Program, MGH, Boston, MA

Patricia S. Fernandez, Esq.
North Andover, MA

Paul Kane, Esq.
McGrath & Kane, Boston, MA

Professor Charles P. Kindregan, Jr.
Suffolk University Law School, Boston, MA

Michael L. Leshin, Esq.
Ginsburg & Leshin, LLP, Wellesley, MA

Paul Perocchi, Esq.
Brown Rudnick Berlack Israels, LLP, Boston, MA

Alan Oliff, Ed.D.
Superintendent of Schools, Weston Public Schools

Honorable Eileen M. Shaevel (ret.)
Dispute Resolution Alternatives, Boston, MA

Carol A. Witt, Esq.
Carol A. Witt, Attorney at Law, LLC, Salem MA