Is Winning Everything in Family Law? It is If You Lost.....

To start with, one does not go to family law court to have fun as a client.


There is an issue or issues, that need to be fixed or rectified, and in some cases such issues are huge. In other cases the problem may not be a life or death matter, but could involve the ability to maintain a living upon the separation of the parties.  Or, it could mean your health isn't that great and you need to maintain health benefits, or it could mean you have been tossed from your residence on some false/fake accusation?      
       

In many cases, to FAIL to win your hearing could be a catastrophic nightmare; or, if you have already LOST your hearing, you may not even have any further chances on that issue unless you can afford a trial?  



Very few lost motions have grounds for actual "reconsideration" under the code.  It would have to really be something legally addressable to even be reconsidered properly.


Thus, winning can be everything in many cases because Family Law participants are often at the edge of homelessness, or have lost jobs, or their kids have been removed because one party lied, or CPS believed there was danger to the kids when there was no danger, or the kids were actually in harm's way and CPS found it unsubstantiated?  In fact Family Law Court is one of the types of situations where a Judge acts as the jury, so not only is everything up to the Judge, you are often only allowed a hearing of 15-20min total for both sides.

If a recommendation from mediation comes out, typically about 75% of such decisions are rubber stamped by Judges. Your remedy is to seek a trial on the issue, and if your trial Judge is the one that rubber stamped the recommendation, you better have your case facts set up if you plan to win.

Attorney's view is that many other attorneys don't necessarily argue the cases persuasively at law and motion hearings, in part because they may have been in Court so many years, they have familiarity with the Court already, whereas an attorney who has not appeared in that court quite as much, has not been tested (as to how the attorney will argue the case...)  In litigation, if argued correctly and persuasively, it will increase the client's chances of winning.

In a dog/pony show court (meaning a Court that is somewhat rigged and one can seldom win there) then it's likely best to have an attorney that appears there regularly and for many years.  Often very small towns present that problem, but Butte County is not likely like that, as the Court in Family Law is different than it was even 5 years ago. It has gotten better due to the changing of Judges, so that makes for more fairness to parties.  So winning can almost mean everything for most clients.  They didn't go to court to lose?