Written on
May 9, 2008
by
David C. Sarnacki
The ABA Litigation News Online reveals a problem with using your employer-provided email address. Your email–even to your attorney–may not be private, confidential or protected.
Ruth E. Piller writes (excerpt):
Employees who believe their email communications with their attorneys are privileged may actually be waiving the attorney-client privilege each time they send or receive email via computers owned by their employer, according to a growing body of law.
For example, in Scott v. Beth Israel Medical Center, a New York trial court recently held that emails that a physician sent to his personal attorney via a computer system owned by his employer were not protected by the attorney-client privilege. The physician was employed by the defendant hospital, which had an email policy mandating that computer and email systems could be used solely for business purposes and warning that employees had no expectation of privacy in any communication that was created, received, saved, or sent using the hospital’s computers.
The physician argued the emails were privileged because they pertained to ongoing litigation between him and the defendant hospital. However, in rejecting the physician’s privilege claim, the court stated that the “effect of an employer email policy, such as that of [Beth Israel], is to have the employer looking over your shoulder each time you send an email. In other words, the otherwise privileged communication between [the plaintiff and his personal counsel] would not have been made in confidence because of the [Beth Israel] policy.” The court added that the physician had no reasonable expectation of confidentiality because the hospital had published a “no personal use” email policy, the hospital reserved the right to monitor all emails, and the physician knew of these policies.
Posted in Law: Cases/Statutes 
No Comments »
Written on
April 23, 2008
by
Randy Flood
I keep finding news of males acting out sexually and violently. It seems that guys get bad news for such behavior. The news gets degendered and reported as criminal behavior by offenders. Men aren’t born to commit such acts, but the male socialization process conditions men for this type of acting out. Unfortunately, a great number of men, and yes, even “successful” and prominent men engage in such acting out. For example, the prevalence of men using women as toys to play with makes a lot of people believe that this is part of being male. I disagree. Men simply need to evolve. The 21st century is here, and the days of wine, women, and brawn are out, and in are temperence, respect, and mindfulness. The use of women as objects for sexual gratification is disrespectful, and a sign of underdevelopment in our humanity. Remember, bike racers use to smoke cigarettes during races believing it expanded their lung capacity heightening their performance. We need to change our thinking and behavior on the function of sexuality in our lives. The use of women solely for sexual pleasure while betraying your intimate partner is problematic. It doesn’t nourish the soul or relationships. In fact, the obsessive pursuit of sexual stimuli for some men can lead to sexual addction.
Sexual addiciton is a toxic process to our character and relational development. When a person suffers from this or other forms of sexual acting out behavior, they need professional help. There is effective treatment for such problems. It is important that men get the help they need, and others begin recognizing this as a social malady rather than “guys being guys”.
We as men can evolve and be strong, and courageous contributors to a world that is in desperate need of more peace, love and understanding within gender, race, sexual orientation, and cultures. We need good men to rise up and take charge of their lives, get the help they need, and encourage others to do the same, so we can move forward in the new millenium.
Posted in General 1 Comment »
Written on
April 23, 2008
by
David C. Sarnacki
MLive-Grand Rapids Press put Maranda in the spotlight with her new “Where You Live” show. This show encourages us to be creative and effective as we guide our children toward becoming responsible and happy adults. The show airs at 7 p.m. Friday on WXSP-TV (Channel 15), Saturday: 7 a.m. and 7:30 p.m. on WOTV–TV (Channel 41); 6:30 p.m. on WOOD-TV (Channel 8).
Rachael Recker writes (excerpt):
WOOD and WXSP President and General Manager Diane Kniowski said “Where You Live” is all about sharing where the resources are and helping families and kids think creatively about issues.
Posted in Families/Children No Comments »
Written on
April 12, 2008
by
David C. Sarnacki
The ABA’s Litigation Update distinguishes between the two ways decision makers approach problems.
Harry Plotkin writes (excerpt):
When humans—especially in groups—are asked to solve intellective problems that have right and wrong answers, they utilize informational processing. They share facts and information with one another in an effort to find a solution, and facts are more persuasive than opinions in shaping decisions. On the other hand, when humans are asked to solve judgmental problems that involve ethical or value-laden judgments about what should be done, they use normative processing. They rely upon opinions, social pressure, and conformity to shape their decisions.
Some trials involve primarily intellective issues—whether a criminal defendant actually committed a crime, or whether a building has construction-related defects, for example. Other trials involve primarily judgmental issues—whether admitted conduct by a defendant in a business case should be interpreted as fraud, negligence, or the breach of a contract, for example. And many trials involve both types of issues—jurors in a personal injury case, for example, may be asked to render intellective (economic) damages and judgmental (non-economic and perhaps punitive) damages.
Posted in Persuasion/Advocacy No Comments »
Written on
April 8, 2008
by
David C. Sarnacki
The Sturgis Journal illustrates what marriage and dancing have in common, putting commitment in perspective.
James and Audora Burg write (excerpt):
The late Paul Pearsall, neuropsychologist and best-selling author of 18 books, noted “Marriage, families, all relationships are more a process of learning the dance rather than finding the right dancer.”
****
Individual tastes aside, there are some definite truisms common to healthy marriages. Marriage researcher John Gottman has extensively documented these specific behaviors, a few of which include accepting influence from each other, turning toward each other (instead of away), and soft starts (particularly by women) when discussing areas of conflict.
Posted in Relationships No Comments »
Written on
April 3, 2008
by
David C. Sarnacki
The International Academy of Collaborative Professionals wants you to discover the collaborative process and whether collaborative divorce is right for you. To that end and for a limited time, the IACP has created a kit that answers many of the common questions about collaborative divorce and has the kit available for download.
Posted in Collaborative Divorce 3 Comments »
Written on
March 21, 2008
by
David C. Sarnacki
Citywire explains the role of the financial specialist in collaborative divorce cases.
Keith G Churchouse writes (excerpt):
Collaborative Divorce is neither mediation nor arbitration. It is a new way of settling divorce, where you seek what is right for each other with the help of a team of professionals, including a financial planner who has passed the resolution exam to perform the role of a financial neutral.
The main role of the financial neutral is to enable the couple to reach an agreement on the financial settlement often the most contentious and acrimonious part of the divorce process, and due to this often takes the most time and money under the normal divorce process.
The assets accumulated during the marriage need to be identified and then divided to provide a solution so that both parties can move on with their lives, and therefore these financial issues can be complex.
The financial neutral (with both parties involved) will calculate their needs, as well as help to stabilize the financial situation, during and after the divorce. They will create an inventory of all assets and liabilities, analyse various settlement scenarios, including the both parties needs when they reach retirement.
Posted in Collaborative Divorce No Comments »
Written on
February 29, 2008
by
David C. Sarnacki
The ABA Journal includes advice what to do when you have to fire a client, usually for not paying legal fees, leaving out important facts and documents, having unrealistic expectations, or being uncooperative or unethical.
Brian Sullivan writes (excerpt)
1. Give reasonable notice of the end of representation [opportunity to hire alternate counsel; termination letter; reminder of deadlines].
2. Check local requirements regarding the right to withdraw. . . .
3. Surrender all documents or property to which the client is entitled. . . .
4. Refund all fees that have not been earned and expenses that have not been incurred. . . .
5. Take other appropriate action necessary to protect the client’s interests. This might include maintaining confidentiality of the client’s matter, suggesting another qualified attorney to take over the case, keeping copies of documents that have been returned and cooperating with the client’s new legal counsel.
Posted in The Practice No Comments »
Written on
February 27, 2008
by
David C. Sarnacki
KDKA reports on the benefits of collaborative divorce and the growing number of couples seeking divorce with dignity.
Sonni Abatta reports (excerpt):
It’s divorce without the judge.
The collaborative divorce takes that third party out of the process and keeps control strictly in the hands of the couple.
****
Many more divorcing couples are discovering this option as they look for peaceful and sometimes quicker ways to divorce.
“It’s basically self directed,” said collaborative lawyer Jackie Stevens. “The attorneys sit there as advisers. That’s their sole purpose.”
****
Tailoring their finances to their exact preferences is one benefit of going the collaborative way.
****
There are some things to keep in mind if you’re considering divorcing collaboratively:
1. If you can’t hash it out in collaboration, you’ll be sent back to court to litigate with a judge.
2. Hourly billing: It’s the same as if you were in court. But since you determine the pace of your case, theoretically, cost savings can be a reality.
3. The process works best for amicable couples.
Posted in Collaborative Divorce 2 Comments »
Written on
February 19, 2008
by
David C. Sarnacki
CNN and Mental Floss spread the true life stories behind some America’s favorite toys!
Tim Moodie’s article highlights:
1. How the Slinky got stuck between a cult and a mid-life crisis (Betty James took over the company her husband founded–the husband who left her for Bolivia–and led the Slinky into the future with Slinky Jr., Plastic Slinky, Slinky Dog, Slinky Pets, Crazy Slinky Eyes and Neon Slinky)
2. Why the guy behind the Erector Set Saved Christmas (Alfred Carlton Gilbert–the “Man Who Saved Christmas”–convinced the United States Council of National Defense to not to proceed with a ban on toy manufacturing due to the market pressures of World War I)
3. Why Lincoln Logs are the most deceptively named toys in the business (John Lloyd Wright named the logs after his father, Frank Lloyd Wright, who was born Frank Lincoln Wright)
4. Captain Kangaroo saved Play-Doh (Joe McVicker offered Captain Kangaroo–a/k/a Bob Keeshan–2% of sales if he would feature Play-Doh on his show)
5. Etch-a-Sketch used to be played like an Atari (the original Etch-A-Sketch was operated with a joystick and later replaced by the two white knobs to make the toy look like a television)
6. Why Trivial Pursuit Almost Never Happened (the game was considered too expensive to manufacture, took over an hour to play, required a vast knowledge of trivial subjects, and was directed at an adult audience)
7. How Mr. Potato Head became a political activist (the spud was featured in the American Cancer Society’s annual “Great American Smokeout” campaign–handing his pipe to Surgeon General C. Everett Koop and swearing off tobacco–promoted the President’s Council on Physical Fitness, and helped “Get out the vote” with the League of Women Voters)
Posted in Something Different No Comments »
Written on
February 18, 2008
by
David C. Sarnacki
The AP and Ithaca Journal discuss marriage after an affair, including the sacrifices required of each spouse to avoid divorce.
Melissa Kossler Dutton writes (excerpt):
Repairing a relationship requires openness and candor from the person who cheated.
“He has to admit that he made a mistake and recognize the hurt of betrayal and say I want to be faithful,” says author John Gray, who examines relationship problems in his latest book “Why Mars and Venus Collide” (HarperCollins, 2008). The person who cheated needs to end the affair and take responsibility, he said.
The adulterer must be willing to disclose all the details of his affair and agree to new degrees of openness, says Rick Reynolds, founder of the Affair Recovery Center in Austin, Texas.
****
It’s not always just the spouse who committed the transgression who has to change after an affair if a marriage is to recover.
Often it’s difficult for the betrayed party to consider what he or she could have done that may have helped lead to the affair, says Meg Haycraft, a Chicago couples specialist who founded a practice called TWOgether. That’s not to say that someone can blame their partner for an affair, she added.
****
[Reynolds] counsels the spouse who cheated to answer any question his or her partner has. But he also sets a date when the questioning must end.
Reynolds also warns the other spouse to be careful when asking for details.
Posted in Relationships 2 Comments »
Written on
February 14, 2008
by
David C. Sarnacki
The Recovery Rebates and Economic Stimulus for the American People Act (February 13, 2008) is the federal “rebate” program highlighted in the media recently.
Who will receive rebate checks?
1. Americans who paid income taxes in 2007 will receive at least $300 for an individual, with married couples receiving at least $600, plus an additional $300 per dependent child under age 17. The rebate total is reduced by $50 for every $1,000 above the income limits of $75,000 for individuals and $150,000 for married couples.
2. Americans who earned at least $3,000 in 2007 will receive $300 if single or $600 if a married couple even if they did not have a tax liability.
What needs to be done to get a rebate check?
File a 2007 tax return.
When will the rebate checks be issued?
The IRS will start mailing out rebate checks in May.
Posted in Finances/Tax 3 Comments »
Written on
February 13, 2008
by
David C. Sarnacki
The New York Times explains how mimicry aids persuasion, if well done.
Benedict Carey writes (excerpt):
The technique involved mirroring a person’s posture and movements, with a one- to two-second delay. If he crosses his legs, then wait two seconds and do the same, with opposite legs. If she touches her face, wait a beat or two and do that. If he drums his fingers or taps a toe, wait again and do something similar.
The idea is to be a mirror but a slow, imperfect one. Follow too closely, and most people catch it — and the game is over.
****
“When you’re being mimicked in a good way, it communicates a kind of pleasure, a social high you’re getting from the other person, and I suspect it activates the areas of the brain involved in sensing reward,” he said.
Posted in Persuasion/Advocacy No Comments »
Written on
February 12, 2008
by
David C. Sarnacki
The New York Times shows that old dogs can learn new tricks, especially in matters of love and marriage.
Tara Parker-Pope writes (excerpt):
Rather than visiting the same familiar haunts and dining with the same old friends, couples need to tailor their date nights around new and different activities that they both enjoy, says Arthur Aron, a professor of social psychology at the State University of New York at Stony Brook. The goal is to find ways to keep injecting novelty into the relationship. The activity can be as simple as trying a new restaurant or something a little more unusual or thrilling — like taking an art class or going to an amusement park.
The theory is based on brain science. New experiences activate the brain’s reward system, flooding it with dopamine and norepinephrine. These are the same brain circuits that are ignited in early romantic love, a time of exhilaration and obsessive thoughts about a new partner. (They are also the brain chemicals involved in drug addiction and obsessive-compulsive disorder.)
Posted in Relationships No Comments »
Written on
February 11, 2008
by
David C. Sarnacki
Name changes at the time of divorce are very simple in Michigan. An additional provision in the judgment of divorce is all it takes. It’s a little more involved when you decide to seek a name change years down the road.
Kent County’s website explains the procedure as follows:
Pre-Requisites
Applicant must be a resident of the county in which they are going to file their petition for a name change for a minimum of 12 months preceding the filing of their petition.
Application Instructions
Petitions for name changes has recently come under the jurisdiction of the Family Division of the Circuit Court. However, many Probate Courts, including Kent County Probate Court, continue to process petitions for name changes. To obtain a name change, the applicant must complete the Petition for Name Change, form PC 51 and file it with the court, and pay the required fee. Currently the filing fee for a petition to change a name is $160.00. The fee is payable in cash, personal check or by money order payable to the Kent County Circuit Court Family Division. This court will not accept personal checks for name change petitions. The form may be obtained via this site or by visiting Probate Court.
If the applicant is 22 years or older, then he or she must have a criminal history background check performed. After the background check is complete the applicant will contact the court to set a hearing date to have the name change. If the applicant has a criminal history, it will be up to the applicant to rebut the presumption that the name change is being sought for fraudulent reasons.
If the applicant is 21 years or younger, he or she may begin the filing process without the background check.
Background Check
A background check is performed to determine if the name change is sought with fraudulent intent.
A background check is not performed on applicants 21 years of age and younger. To obtain the necessary background check, the applicant must take the completed copy of the Petition for Name Change to their local Police Department and obtain a set of finger prints.
• You will need to obtain fingerprint applicant card.
• Make sure that the Police Department puts the proper ORI number on the fingerprint card.
• Kent County Probate Court ORI Number is: MI 410013J
Once the applicant has obtained the fingerprint card from the Police Department, he or she must mail or deliver the following items to the address listed below.
• Copy of the Petition for Name Change
• State Applicant Fingerprint Card
• $54.00 non-refundable fee payable to the State of Michigan
MICHIGAN STATE POLICE
CENTRAL RECORDS DIVISION
7150 HARRIS DRIVE
LANSING, MI 48913
The applicant’s background check must go through the State of Michigan and the Federal Bureau of Investigation. It takes approximately 3 to 4 weeks for the background check to be completed. The court upon receipt of the completed background check will then contact the applicant to set the hearing date for the name change.
It is very important that the applicant file with the court a copy of the petition for the name change at the same time that the fingerprints are being sent to the State Police. The court will use the information on the petition to contact the applicant once the background check has been completed and returned to the court.
Once the applicant has received notice from Probate Court that the court is ready to proceed on the petition for the name change, he or she must visit the Probate Court building during normal business hours to begin the filing process.
Fee Listing
Fee Payee Description
$54.00 State of Michigan Adults 22+ (Finger Printing)
$160.00 Kent County Circuit Court Court Filing Fee
$64.00 Legal News Paper Publication
$12.00 Kent County Probate Court Certified Order of Name Change
$40.00 State of Michigan Name Change of Birth Certificate
Posted in Law: Cases/Statutes No Comments »
Written on
February 7, 2008
by
David C. Sarnacki
The Michigan Court of Appeals is publishing Berger v. Berger (Case No. 279025; January 31, 2008). The court addressed a number of legal issues surrounding divorces with children:
10-day residency requirement of MCL 552.9(1)
We do not agree with defendant’s argument that MCL 552.9(1) requires plaintiff’s continuing physical presence in Jackson County for the 10 days immediately preceding filing for divorce. The statute’s plain language requires only that plaintiff have established her residence for the “10 days immediately preceding the filing of the complaint.” Once plaintiff established and intended for Jackson County to be her residence on December 16, 2005, her temporary absence did not destroy it.
Michigan’s Child Custody Act
In sum, on the basis of the trial court’s credibility determinations, the evidence does not clearly preponderate against the court’s finding that an established custodial environment existed
in plaintiff, not defendant. Fletcher, supra at 879; Sinicropi, supra at 155. Therefore the trial court’s finding is not against the great weight of the evidence and must be affirmed. MCL
722.28; Fletcher, supra at 879. It follows that defendant had the burden of proving by clear and convincing evidence that a change of custody would to be in the children’s best interest. MCL
722.27(1)(c); Mason, supra at 195.
****
In summary, the trial court’s determination that an established custodial environment existed with plaintiff and its findings regarding the “best interests of the child” factors under
MCL 722.23 were not against the great weight of the evidence, nor did the trial court commit clear legal error on a major issue. MCL 722.28. Further, the court’s ultimate discretionary
custody decision was not a palpable abuse of discretion. Shulick, supra at 325.
****
We find that both parties erroneously focus on sheer quantity of parenting time awarded to defendant. Rather, the best interests of the children govern this and all other custody issues.
MCL 722.27a(1); Borowsky, supra; Mason, supra at 194. Here, the trial court determined that mid-week parenting time was disruptive to the children, so it substituted other parenting time.
The court’s finding was not against the great weight of the evidence, nor did the court commit clear legal error. Rather, the trial court’s ruling fostered the best interests of the children. The
court’s modification of its earlier parenting time schedule is not a basis for finding a palpable abuse of discretion; therefore, this Court must affirm the trial court’s order. MCL 722.28;
Borowsky, supra at 688.
Equitable distribution of property
Additionally, the tenor of the trial court’s comments suggests its divergent property division was intended to punish defendant for his affair with Johnson, which the court found particularly egregious. In dividing the marital estate, “a judge’s role is to achieve equity, not to ‘punish’ one of the parties.” Sands, supra at 37-38. Here, the record indicates the trial court was more intent on imposing punishment than in equitably apportioning the marital property. For these reasons, this Court is left with the firm conviction that the trial court’s dispositional ruling
dividing the marital property with plaintiff receiving 70 percent and defendant receiving 30 percent was inequitable. Consequently, we remand to the trial court for the purpose of achieving a division of property that is fair and equitable.
Imputation of income under Michigan Child Support Formula
These factors generally ensure that adequate fact-finding supports the conclusion that the parent to whom income is imputed has an actual ability and likelihood of earning the imputed
income. Ghidotti, supra at 198-199; Stallworth, supra at 285. Here, however, it is undisputed that plaintiff possessed the actual ability to earn the amount of income defendant argues the trial court should have imputed to her. The presence of children in the home of the party is a factor under the child support formula, but is directed to “its impact on the earnings.” 2004 MCSF 2.10(E)(4). In that regard, the trial court in awarding custody to plaintiff determined “that even during the limited time frame when the Plaintiff-mother was working full-time, she was still able to use a flexible schedule that maximized her quality time with the children.” Finally, 2004 MCSF 2.10(F) provides: “Imputation must be applied equally to payers and payees, and to men
and women.” (Emphasis added.) For these reasons, we conclude the trial court abused its discretion in failing to impute income to plaintiff in an amount more truly representing her
earning capacity for the purpose of calculating defendant’s child support obligation.
****
Because the trial court’s award of spousal support was limited to one year and aimed at assisting plaintiff’s transition to becoming a full-time working mother, we conclude the award
was just and reasonable under the circumstances of the case. Moore, supra at 654. Consequently, the trial court did not abuse its discretion.
Posted in Law: Cases/Statutes No Comments »
Written on
February 6, 2008
by
David C. Sarnacki
MSNBC.com and LiveScience report on the study of relationships by the University of Michigan’s Institute for Social Research (Kira Birditt, Lisa Jackey and Toni Antonucci). The conclusion: Marriage–It only gets worse!
MSNBC reports (excerpt):
“As we age and become closer and more comfortable with one another, it could be that we’re more able to express ourselves to each other,” said lead study author Kira Birditt, a research fellow at the University of Michigan’s Institute for Social Research. “In other words, it’s possible that negativity is a normal aspect of close relationships that include a great deal of daily contact.”
Rather than breeding unhappy couples and ill health, the increase in negativity could be a normal part of relationships.
Posted in Relationships No Comments »
Written on
January 28, 2008
by
David C. Sarnacki
The Statesman Journal discusses waitressing, leadership and mimicry. The article includes a summary of the 4 stages of persuasion.
Dick Hughes writes (excerpt):
Author Jay Conger, writing in the Harvard Business Review, postulates four essential stages to persuasion:
1. Establish credibility . . . .
2. Frame for common ground . . . .
3. Provide evidence . . . .
4. Connect emotionally . . . .
Posted in Persuasion/Advocacy No Comments »
Written on
January 21, 2008
by
David C. Sarnacki
CNN/Oprah helps us differentiate between fantasy love and real love.
Martha Beck writes (excerpt):
Want an honest and long lasting relationship? Make sure you and your partner can recite these five statements.
I can live without you, no problem
***
. . . “I can live without you” is an assurance that sets the stage for real love.
My love for you will definitely change
***
. . . A love that is allowed to adapt to new circumstances is virtually indestructible.
You’re not everything I need
***
Sacrificing all our individual needs doesn’t strengthen a relationship. Mutually supporting each other’s personal growth does.
I won’t always hold you close
***
. . . [T]rue love is based on setting the beloved free to make his or her own choices.
You and I aren’t one
***
. . . Dare to explore your differences. Agree to disagree. If you’re accustomed to disappearing, this will allow you to see that you can be loved as you really are. . . .
Posted in Relationships No Comments »
Written on
January 11, 2008
by
David C. Sarnacki
US News & World Report helps potential retirees figure out their Social Security benefits with Emily Brandon’s article “Marriage and Social Security Benefits.” The article provides a good overview of the interplay between retirement benefits, spouse’s option to elect earnings records, survivor benefits, and different scenarios that demonstrate the best strategy to maximize benefits.
Some of Brandon’s key points are:
Survivor’s benefit
Delaying a claim for retirement benefits may increase the survivor’s benefit.
Single men, single women
Based on traditional life expectancies, men should claim early and women later.
Traditional married couple
If the husband is the bigger income producer, wives should claim early and husbands later (e.g., age 69 if possible).
Factors
To find the best strategy for you and your spouse, you need to evaluate the lower earner’s benefit and the age difference between the two of you.
Posted in Finances/Tax 1 Comment »
