I am pleased and proud to announce that I have been admitted to the Bar of the Supreme Court of the United States.
After having read this article in the New Yorker, I feel compelled to share it. It is about as realistic a picture as I have ever seen in the media of the high stakes in a Family Court neglect case.
One thing I will say however is that the Deputy County Attorneys and CPS workers I deal with on a daily basis here in Rochester have never engaged in the type of tactics described of their Bronx counterparts in the article, but the point stands: when in doubt the nature of things these days sometimes compels the removal of a child from the home of a parent. And that removal can have tremendous ripple effects on everyone involved.
I have represented dozens of parents accused of neglect and/or abuse in Family Court, so if you find yourself in need of assistance on a case like this, please contact me right away.
The owners of the building where my office is located have assembled a really cool brochure on the storied history of the building. I found it was really neat and interesting so I thought I would share. Please click on each image to enlarge. Enjoy:
I’m quite certain I’ve spent more time talking about the Charlie Tan case in the last year than any other case that I was not involved in. In any event, here is the link to the recent Democrat and Chronicle article about the District Attorney’s Office appealing the trial court’s decision to grant the defense’s Trial Order of Dismissal.
The New York Court of Appeals issued a potential landmark decision on August 30th that has particular relevance in the area of family law regarding same-sex couples.
In Matter of Brooke S.B., the Court of Appeals overturned its prior holding in Matter of Alison D. which denied non-biological parents standing to petition for custody and/or visitation rights. Acknowledging that significant advancements in state law have taken place since the 1991 Alison D. decision, including not insignificantly the right of same-sex couples to marry, the Court of Appeals acknowledged that the prior holding unfairly failed to take into consideration the particular circumstances of now estranged same-sex couples who had previously agreed to conceive and parent a child. Prior to Brooke S.B., the non-biological parent in that situation, i.e. not the partner who had provided the egg or sperm for conception, had no right to petition for custody or visitation of the couple’s former child or children (although, ironically, the non-biological parent could be liable for child support). Now, based upon s showing of certain factual requirements (such as evidence of an agreement between partners to conceive and raise a child together), the non-biological parent does indeed have standing to proceed in Family Court seeking custody and/or visitation rights based on the best interests of the child.
Family law is a constantly evolving area of my practice that adapts to meet the realities of today’s complex personal situations. Every case is different. Please contact me if I can be of assistance in your particular case.
Matthew J. Rich
If you're looking for an attorney, chances are it's because you're facing a problem of some sort. Matthew J. Rich's goal is to help you with your problem, be your informed advocate, and ultimately get you a fair and satisfactory outcome. Matthew J. Rich is on your side.