Other Discussions > Off Topic
Legal Advice Needed
KungPoweChicken:
Because of a soon to be contested custody issue, I was served with an ex-parte temporary restraining order. Upon reading about ex-parte restraining orders, they appear to be granted liberally.
I have no legal record of any kind, and there is no documented history of abuse, injuries, threats of imminent harm, etc. Concerning the affidavit, it is grossly exaggerated and some parts include lies. It seems as though it was granted because the petitioner simply alleged fear.
Anyway, I hired a fairly high priced family law attorney; however, he does not seem particularly interested in what I would consider “good evidence” to defend myself. I believe I have documented evidence that will point to many inconsistencies in the affidavit, evidence to point to a lack of meeting the legal standard, and evidence to point to significant ulterior motives.
My attorney mostly just says “relax, you have a good lawyer. You don’t want you to worry about anything.”
Is this typical? He does not even know the full scope of the issue, how to refute the affidavit, what concrete facts prove ulterior motive, etc. Am I over thinking this? Is this simply a matter of appearance and believability when speaking to the judge? Or is it simply a matter of if the petitioner wants the TRO extended and there not being much defense because it’s simply a preponderance of the evidence? For those with legal experience, what is the best defense in a situation like this?
Thank you all.
Roy H.:
Often clients get hyper-fixated on small factual differences that don’t make a difference. Your attorney is pushing back against that. He knows what’s important.
Generally, these cases are won or lost based upon the testimony of the plaintiff. Does the judge believe her? Cross-examination by your attorney is the most important part of hearing. You will testify, but unless you say something dumb, the judges analysis will be mostly on what she says, and how scared she seems.
KungPoweChicken:
--- Quote from: Roy H. on July 26, 2018, 06:36:44 AM ---Often clients get hyper-fixated on small factual differences that don’t make a difference. Your attorney is pushing back against that. He knows what’s important.
Generally, these cases are won or lost based upon the testimony of the plaintiff. Does the judge believe her? Cross-examination by your attorney is the most important part of hearing. You will testify, but unless you say something dumb, the judges analysis will be mostly on what she says, and how scared she seems.
--- End quote ---
Thanks for the advice. I’ve hired an attorney who deals with this kind of stuff frequently, but I wish there was something more I could do. What would make a compelling cross examination?
Erik:
To add to what Roy said, years ago I rented a car and someone dented the back in the parking lot, which was documented upon return. When the insurance got the estimate I requested the pictures. They tried to tack on front damages to my claim. I told my insurance adjuster that they’re trying to pull a fast one on us and had evidence and everything that they’re lying and to get this throw out in court. I was expecting a My cousin Vinny performance. He asked me if I returned the car damaged and I said yes. He said well then it doesn’t matter. They’ll win the suit.
Long story short the stuff you see on TV where they find 1 flaw in the argument and the entire case gets thrown out rarely happens in real life. Most of this stuff is procedural. The stuff we find to be important (how we would present information in court) typically doesn’t align with what actually happens.
Roy H.:
--- Quote from: KungPoweChicken on July 26, 2018, 07:09:49 AM ---
--- Quote from: Roy H. on July 26, 2018, 06:36:44 AM ---Often clients get hyper-fixated on small factual differences that don’t make a difference. Your attorney is pushing back against that. He knows what’s important.
Generally, these cases are won or lost based upon the testimony of the plaintiff. Does the judge believe her? Cross-examination by your attorney is the most important part of hearing. You will testify, but unless you say something dumb, the judges analysis will be mostly on what she says, and how scared she seems.
--- End quote ---
Thanks for the advice. I’ve hired an attorney who deals with this kind of stuff frequently, but I wish there was something more I could do. What would make a compelling cross examination?
--- End quote ---
He will try to trip her up, trying to make her story look like she’s changing it. He may inquire about her actions immediately following the alleged event. (“You say you were scared, but you didn’t call the police, did you? You didn’t call your mom, did you? You didn’t call your best friend? I’m curious, did you consult with a family law attorney before filing this complaint?” )
Obviously I don’t have any evidence to go off of, but you get the gist.
They may offer an option where you give up your right to a hearing and agree not to have contact , but where the judge doesn’t find that you committed abuse. There can be pluses and minuses to that sort of voluntary order, so ask your attorney his advice on that, or if it’s even a possibility.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
Go to full version