Motivational speakers often say, “If you keep on doing what you’ve always done, you’ll keep on getting what you’ve always got.” In the context of forensic custody evaluations, this maxim could be paraphrased for the benefit of the courts: “If you keep on accepting shoddy work-product, you’ll keep on getting shoddy work-product.” In L.R. v. T.R.,1 Justice Robert Ross of Supreme Court, Nassau County, makes clear that such deficient work-product is not welcome in his courtroom. His decision provides a guiding beacon for identifying a number of forensic errors that are frequently encountered but often overlooked. It is, therefore, eminently instructive for custody courts, attorneys, and evaluators.
Facts
On May 25, 2010, the court held the plaintiff-wife in contempt based upon findings that she was alienating the parties’ children against their father. This determination was predicated upon findings that the wife had violated “the parental access provisions” of the parties’ divorce judgment and that she had engaged in “false reporting of sexual abuse allegations.”
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
