We are conducting a survey of legal billings. If you are willing to mail us copies of your legal bills, (redacting any personal information), please advise; and thank you.

Why it's important to know the best attorneys. (We do.)

New York Lawyer reported that in 2007, there were more complaints about judges than in the entire history of the Commission.

Complaints on New York Judges.

Of the 160 complaints received about Family Court Judges, Page 13 reports 29 were investigated. Meaning, as is true with most states, with the 131 complaints which were closed without an investigation, a large part of the budget is spent in leasing office space that houses administrative personnel who opt to quickly close, rather than investigate complaints.

Warning: Possible Email Scam for Film, "Support? System Down" now includes New York Film festivals.

There's a possible, (yet clumsy) email scam requesting money from fathers rights film maker, Angelo Lobo.

The pitch is a wind-up for a still unnamed, mystery film festival. You may remember Lobo wrote, produced and directed his fantasy documentary, titled "Support? System Down."

Well, he’s baaaaacck. Fresh from Georgia, Lobo is now aiming for New York.

Lobo’s quest began on Saturday, April 11, 2009, when FamilyLawCourts.com received an email requesting money for the film.

According to Lobo, “Support? System Down," was "tentatively accepted in an Atlanta film festival." We immediately wrote for verification. (No response.)

On Monday, April 13, 2009, we contacted officials at all five of Atlanta's film festivals and were told films are not "tentatively” accepted. They either are accepted or not. (This includes one rep who works with a festival that screens documentaries only.)

As such, on Monday morning, (April 13, 2009), FamilyLawCourts.com continued making calls to Lobo requesting he identify the film festival he claimed "Support? System Down" was going to be screened, as a follow-up to the same email request of Lobo’s supporter, of April 11, 2009.

Neither Lobo or his supporter responded to any calls or emails.

However, late Monday night, Lobo sent out *another* email - this time thanking supporters for the six hundred dollars received so far….and asked for more cash.

Lobo upped the ante to include another, unnamed New York festival. (No surprise there.) So it appears although Atlanta film festival organizers are saying “No film here” Lobo is going to stick with his mystery film festival, and, add another one from New York.

Also not mentioned with Lobo's latest quest for cash?

That "Support? System Down" bombed at earlier New York Film Festivals.

It seems the cash-strapped Lobo is upping the ante. His clumsy attempt to explain why he wasn't releasing the name of the Atlanta Film Festival now includes New York. See below. (Yes, we saved the original.) Separate from the spelling and grammar errors, it struck us as pretty lame.

"Question: Which festival in Atlanta?

A: Unfortunately, At this time we are not revealing the exact one there are many, including one we are being considered in NY as we write, until we can reach this goal and then a NATIONAL Press release will be sent to AP announcing all updated info with Dates.

What’s The reason behind the confidentiality? The truth, as many of you know, there is an opposition that would love for this film to fail and or NOT be released. There is to much “money” at stake. We want to make sure that we have a seamless screening and because of over a dozen NOs and rejections because of the topic content we will not release the names just yet."

****

The reality? The movie is two years old, not a documentary, and already failed at screenings across the nation.

Original details below.

Received an emailed plea for financial support from Angelo Lobo, the Producer/Writer/Director of "Support? System Down" supposedly to enable the film to be shown at an unnamed movie festival in Atlanta. In checking the website no specific festival was listed.

This seemed very strange. Calls and emails to Mr. Lobo requesting he verify the festival, were not returned. However, calls and emails to all five area Atlanta Film Festivals were. None had heard of Mr. Lobo or the film. This includes a festival specializing in documentaries.

It seems our calls frightened Mr. Lobo. Later, we received another email expressing a need for confidentiality because “some people want us to fail.”

First, we have never heard of any producer refusing to identify a movie festival he or she hopes to screen a movie. Secondly, the movie has already failed, (hence the ongoing requests for money). But more importantly, Lobo continues billing the film as a documentary exposing corruption in the child support system, although it is not a documentary. Below addresses why.

1. The individuals and groups interviewed in this movie paid to be included. However because Mr. Lobo chose not to mention their paid "support" the public remains unaware of their financial incentive.

2. Mr. Lobo plays a key role in the movie. He tells the audience the Texas, courthouse double murder committed by David Hernandez Arroyo Sr., was why he had to make the movie. As the shooting made national news, any true documentarian would interview family members and police personnel. Mr. Lobo did not. Including the surviving son David Hernandez Arroyo Jr., who shot by his own father.

3. We saw the movie during the Del Mar screening a few years ago, after being assured by Mr. Lobo the movie was a proponent for "shared parenting." It was not. The first woman speaking against the child support system didn't appear until well into the movie, and her one-line, seconds-on-screen qualifies as a cameo. (The second woman's appearance was near the film end. By now she could be lying on the cutting room floor).

4. However, after watching the film I immediately obtained copies of police reports surrounding the murders, as well as prior instances of calls to the family home, and the killer's earlier arrest for DUI. We interviewed police personnel and quite a different picture emerged. Unfortunately the facts surrounding the murders are missing from the film.

The reality? After a twenty-two year marriage the David Sr., who'd been arrested before, continued to terrorize his family. David also swore he'd never pay child support for his six year old son. The police defaulted on protecting Mirabel Estrada. (Also not uncommon.) Mirabel told the police translator he'd kill her.

Newspaper reports quoting her attorney, Joshua Wintters, saying Mirabel was not fearful were not fact-checked, and remained wildly inaccurate.

Ms. Estrada did not speak English, which may have also contributed to the continuing inaccuracies. However, we spoke with the police translator who told me Mirabel said she did not believe she'd survive the divorce.

Thus the reality is Mr. Lobo wants financial support for documentary that isn't, while attempting to make family killer, Mr. Arroyo, the poster boy for an unfair child support system. It seems Mr. Lobo could have picked a better role model, or chosen make a more truthful film.

Unfortunately, he chose neither.

Anyone can support whatever film they desire. However, as Mr. Lobo has not been truthful in his emails, his movie, or his representations of film festivals, we urge people to think carefully before deciding to "support" a film that isn't accurate during these hard, economic times.

In other news, self-described "Role Model" and Chris Brown look-alike kills most of his family days after his wedding.

For anyone who thinks Mayor Bloomberg cares about vulnerable children, we encourage them to Furrgettaboutit.

Forging judges signature costs Brooklyn attorney her law license.

Official Misogyny

We ask that you please not write us about your awful case as hundreds have, each writer making the same Complaint, and assuring us their case is the worst. Many ask us to do something. We're not a volunteer organization...but recommend in the interests of cleaning up the bench, you can educate others to a good or bad judge, by creating a report at USAjudges.com

Where's the child support?

Divorce wigouts. Blowing up the building instead of losing it in a divorce.

Who wins? The lawyers.

So one needs the best. We know the best, and who best to avoid. But the parade of lies Continues.

A NY writer added the below, after reading a California newspaper article concerning The deliberate lack of oversight regarding Supervised Visitation monitors, (There's no monitoring their expertise, or lack thereof.)

"Kim wrote on January 18, 2006 4:48 AM:"I am the former co-founder and owner of an off-site supervised visitation service company in New York...out of Westchester County. And unfortunately, I could not agree more with this article. In fact, it is due to the complete incompetence and lack of oversight, understanding of divorce dynamics and family interation of my young married partners, that I distanced myself from the company. Although, I have a law degree, run a small business on Divorce as well as a chapter of a National Not-for Profit agency whose specialty is complicated divorces for some 15 years...my parnters were neophytes in the divorce industry. Nonetheless, the Court continues to recommend distraught parents to an incompetent agency. But they are just one of many. The supervisiors pay no attention to manipulation, gamenship of some of the parents. The children who regurgitate the sentiments of one parent verbatim, all in an effort to gain an advantage in the divorce,whether it be in the custody or equitable distribution arena. The few supervised agencies that exist, at least in NY, are unregulated, unmonitered and unskilled. Many of the supervisors are volunteers. Some of have been know to carry weapons. None, of them that I am aware have extensive training in Domestic Violence or abuse. And yet, Judges eager to find some solution to the need for supervision, just abdicate their role and allow the supervising agency.....whose training they do not know, whose background they do not know, to set schedules, and oversee the supervision. They do not take into consideration, the transference, manipulation or downright lies that the supervised parent may exhibit, or are able to tell if the custodial parent is playing a game. In the meantime, the environment that these minor children are subjected to, often, cold, damp basements in Chuches, is atrocious and any parent worth his or her salt would never expose their beloved child to this, yet, the Court allows such treatment of children. Supervision is unfortunately, a necessary evil where there is abuse of the partner, child or addictive behavior. But as with many of the issues with the matrimonial system, a complete overhaul most be done, with proper training in chld care, family dynamics, abuse issues, DV, addiction, and finally the ability to fade into the background and not influence the parent child exchange. It must be done legislatively and be taken seriously. But as usual, it is about families, and it/we are the last interest of the government. A large corporation takes priority over what is the backbone of society, the ever present family."

Below is a brief tour of Family court. Try to stay out of it. We ask that you please don't write us about your awful case, because we have several thousand letters with each writer making the same Complaint, while assuring us their case is the worst. Many ask us to do something. Most think we're a volunteer organization.

However, lest parent think the needs of children are paramount in a judge's mind; we'd like to remind you of State Supreme Court Justice JAMES YATES. On May 19, 2005, YATES sentenced Eleazar Alvarado to seven years in prison despite the prosecution's objections and request for a 20-year sentence.

Alvarado, whose new wife was pregnant, had been raping her ten year old daughter from a previous marriage, from 2002 - 2004...including after fathering a daughter with the daughter's mother. The ten year old delivered her baby by him, at age eleven.

Yes, JUDGE JAMES YATES thought seven years was a punishment fitting the crime. That said, once "Family Justice Center's begin, no matter that they start out with Good intentions,

It's always a case of two, separate branches of government, getting too cozy. What judge is going to oppose a Request coming from this facility? That's the part that scares us, and no one can really answer these questions.

That said, should you desire help mediating an issue, we are available to assist. The below is to educate the reader as to how the system works, (it doesn't), but it does drain your finances and puts your emotional stability at risk, while you learn this.

We hope this information will help you to sort out your priorities.

We also, do this as a warning. Once a party rushes to court, they essentially are inviting the State to micro-manage their life until the children reach the age of eighteen. This good news only if, as a parent you enjoy watching your finances pour into the hands of lawyers, therapists, court-appointed evaluators, and visitation monitors; while your children become emotionally, or physically, at risk. If your children are being abused, call the police...after reading the "Bad Cops" section, if you feel you can Find a good cop.

Those divorcing, or about to engage in a custody suit; would be better served, unless they don't care about their children, to work with a trusted, Neutral, third party in an attempt to work out a Settlement Agreement, Before breaking land-speed records, to get to court.

People would do well to realize the business of government is Business. To plant oneself and one's family before a judge, guarantees the judge will act as a sales rep for all in this unregulated, out-of-control, career field: Attorneys, Therapists, Visitation centers and monitors, Evaluators and Guardian Ad Litems, who operate in the industry.

At some point adults sometimes break. However, readers turn to the Internet to learn the horrors of family court; and why the system is structured to remain the same, as traditional media doesn't staff family court, although it is the one court subscribers most visit.

Want proof? Read the below and ask yourself, other than names, what's changed in five years.

NEW YORK -- December 2000,

A domestic violence counselor walked up to his estranged girlfriend on acrowded Midtown Manhattan street Friday, fatally shot the man she was withand then opened fire on her, killing her with a point-blank shot to herforehead as she lay wounded, the police said.Before the police arrived, the man fled. Police officials said Friday nightthat they knew the gunman's identity and were seeking him.The senior police official said the suspect worked for the New York City Alternative Assistance Program, which the official described as a domesticviolence counseling service where offenders are referred by the city's court system.

Credit: New York Times News Service

Decatur- GA. Family Abuse Cop Kills Father-in-law, Self

Police said the killer, (a nine-year veteran, and senior investigator withthe sheriff's department's domestic violence unit), shot two adults and achild.

"I considered him a man of integrity," said Investigator Ben Gaither, withSheriff Dorsey adding, "It was a very regrettable and unfortunate incident.�

Murder as an �unfortunate incident,� reflects an interesting thoughtprocess. Police departments famously ignore warning signs, then express�shock� whenever an officer kills themselves/others.

But the murderous best example of not taking threats seriously was perhaps simply because the caller was a woman.

Brooks Brown�s mother called the Sheriff no less than six times, desperately concerned about two Columbine students she felt were violent, (including plans mentioned on their website). Mrs. Brooks made two police reports. Ultimately, her calls were unreturned. Post massacre, Mrs. Brown�s ongoing pleas for help by the department as, �something that just fell through thecracks,� instead of gross criminal negligence on the part of the sheriff�s office.

News to Watch For: Most New York publications treat family murders as two-day stories, Tops..

Exposing greed, and a long, troubled lack of regard for the Most Vulnerable,editors opt for silence, instead of substantive coverage, or reform.

This is why we recommend avoiding State Courts, when uncoupling, until a Stipulation can be worked out; if at all, possible.

Au Bar Owner Wouldn't Have the Same Problem in California. Courts rule hair testing doesn't fly. .

Manhattan Judge Arlene Goldberg remained, out of control, waffling on custody issues, ringing up attorney fees.

Judge Arlene Goldberg Ms. Marks paid double-digit thousands before regaining her twins, but the father won't pay. For some reason, traditional media don't name his attorneys. We wonder why?

Ka-ching!

Need another example? See below, brief, lesson of greed, historically.

October 14, 2001 -- GUARDIAN'S GRAVY TRAIN ENDS

The guardian appointed by the court to look after Ron Perelman and Pat Duff's precious daughter, Caleigh, must be devastated now that their custody battle is finally over - she's raked in an estimated $1.5 million since the litigation began five years ago.

Caleigh, 6, is only one of the high-profile tots lawyer Jo Ann Douglas has been appointed to oversee, at huge costs to the divorcing parents.

Douglas was also made guardian for Andrew and Caroline Giuliani in the mayor's tussle with Donna Hanover; the children of actress Tatum O'Neal and tennis star John McEnroe; Jacques Emery, son of "Footloose" star Lori Singer and lawyer Richard Emery; and Lara, the daughter of publishing honcho Judith Regan, who spent six years in court.

After the Appellate Division denied the multimillionaire mom's final bid to overturn the shared-custody decision in the case - a voucher was signed granting Douglas a final payment of nearly $500,000.

In June, Douglas justified her privileged position to The Post by stating, "I love representing kids." (ed: well, Duh.)

But even when it's over, it's not over. Douglas could continue to ride the Duff-Perelman, and other millionaire gravy trains for years to come. New rules make it even harder for guardians to be appointed in big cases unless they've handled big cases in the past, cementing Douglas' position as the world's best-paid baby sitter.

Douglas, a widow who lives with a dozen or so dogs, has earned a reputation for always siding with the fathers of the children she is sworn to protect when it comes time to make her recommendation to the court.

It does appear to be a pattern. Duff accused Douglas of favoring Perelman; Singer tried to have her removed as her son's guardian; and Regan refused to pay her exorbitant fees, and is now being sued by Douglas.

Douglas has also come under fire for the way she manages to get appointed on lucrative, high-profile cases. "It's all patronage," one court insider complained to PAGE SIX. "She makes more money than any judge." (ed: Kickbacks weren't included).

Delayed justice for sale in New York...by judges.

On August 23, 2001, The New York Post, Page Six column, declared, sometime actor, Roy Scheider, dodged a court date to explain why he hadn't ponied up on his agreement with his ex-wife, in keeping with their agreement. According to the article, the no-shows irked local hearing officer Morton I. Willen, who called their actions, "Intolerable."

Oh please.

If Willen thought Sharp's actions were intolerable, why then, did Willen tolerate them? Because the divorce industry is About Business.

Willen wasn't rankled enough to Do anything but, Ka-Ching! - - Schedule Another Hearing!

The facts are below. You be the judge.

"The jaws of the law are closing in on Roy Scheider over his efforts to avoid shelling out $1.4 million to his ex-wife Cynthia, who wants him thrown behind bars for failing to make the payments stipulated in their 1989 divorce agreement," reported Page Six.

Page Six continued, reporting Scheider and mouthpiece, Samuel Sharp, shined the court date, annoying Judge Morton I. Willen. (Was Willen just wanting to glimpse a former Star?) Maybe. We know minutes before the hearing Sharp called to say he was stuck in traffic.

However, Willen checked Nassau and Suffolk County highway patrols - - who reported traffic was easing through its normal clip.

Sharp promptly backpedaled. Said he was, "all burnt out and he could not make it," (according to a court transcript).

So Willen brands Sharp's stall as, "intolerable," and a, "sham, cynical and frivolous" and that, "If Scheider ducks the next hearing, scheduled for a few weeks hence, he could eventually find himself in the slammer," yada, yada, yada. And we say...

No. It's ALL a shuck.

Scheduling multiple hearings, clogging the calendar, again, serves only the billing needs of attorneys. Those arriving to court for Resolution, need to watch how the process of emptying their bank accounts, works.

Will people learn the divorce business is about business? We are not sure. We do know, however, as one of the few sites to report exclusively on family court; that subscribers will learn on-line, before print and television.

For a family law education, New York Style, check out the documentary film,

"Small Justice"

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Site Navigation: