<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Domestic Diversions &#187; Law: Cases/Statutes</title>
	<atom:link href="http://domesticdiversions.com/index.php/category/law-casesstatutes/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://domesticdiversions.com</link>
	<description>1.  Good counsel on matters of relationships, families and family law.  2.  The efforts of good people working together to advance the mind, arouse the heart, and amuse the spirit.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 07 May 2012 17:07:41 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>Annulling a marriage because of &#8220;fraud&#8221;</title>
		<link>http://domesticdiversions.com/index.php/929/</link>
		<comments>http://domesticdiversions.com/index.php/929/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Sep 2011 16:43:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>David C. Sarnacki</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Law: Cases/Statutes]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://domesticdiversions.com/?p=929</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[FindLaw shows the traditional and the modern approaches to annulments based on allegations of fraud.
Joanna L. Grossman writes (excerpt):
In Part One of this series, I discussed the traditional approach to defining fraud as a ground for annulment, which requires that the misrepresentation relate to the &#8220;essentials of the marriage&#8221; – some aspect of marriage that [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://domesticdiversions.com/index.php/929/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>To fault or to no-fault: That is the question</title>
		<link>http://domesticdiversions.com/index.php/to-fault-or-to-no-fault-that-is-the-question/</link>
		<comments>http://domesticdiversions.com/index.php/to-fault-or-to-no-fault-that-is-the-question/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 14 May 2011 10:24:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>David C. Sarnacki</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Law: Cases/Statutes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Persuasion/Advocacy]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://domesticdiversions.com/?p=916</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The New York Times covers the topic of divorce lawyers discovering evidence from social networking sites.  Included is a comment about the role of fault in a no-fault divorce.
Nadine Brozan writes (excerpt):
“No-fault does not mean that fault is irrelevant,” said Kenneth P. Altshuler, a lawyer in Portland, Me., and the president-elect of the American [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://domesticdiversions.com/index.php/to-fault-or-to-no-fault-that-is-the-question/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Footnoting button pushing, wedding gifts, infidelity gene, Hell&#8217;s Angels, a finger, jackass, emails, &#8220;stupid person&#8221;</title>
		<link>http://domesticdiversions.com/index.php/footnoting-button-pushing-wedding-gifts-infidelity-gene-hells-angels-a-finger-jackass-emails-stupid-person/</link>
		<comments>http://domesticdiversions.com/index.php/footnoting-button-pushing-wedding-gifts-infidelity-gene-hells-angels-a-finger-jackass-emails-stupid-person/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 07 Feb 2011 18:03:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>David C. Sarnacki</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Law: Cases/Statutes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Procedures/Rules]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Something Different]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://domesticdiversions.com/?p=902</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Ontario Superior Court Justice J.W. Quinn wrote some interesting footnotes to his decision in Bruni v. Bruni, 2010 ONSC 6568 (COURT FILE NO.: 384/07; November 29, 2010):
[2]               At one point in the trial, I asked Catherine: “If you could push a [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://domesticdiversions.com/index.php/footnoting-button-pushing-wedding-gifts-infidelity-gene-hells-angels-a-finger-jackass-emails-stupid-person/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Separating parenting and paying: In re Beck</title>
		<link>http://domesticdiversions.com/index.php/separating-parenting-and-paying-in-re-beck/</link>
		<comments>http://domesticdiversions.com/index.php/separating-parenting-and-paying-in-re-beck/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 21 Dec 2010 18:58:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>David C. Sarnacki</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Law: Cases/Statutes]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://domesticdiversions.com/?p=895</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Michigan Supreme Court released its decision in Department of Human Servs v Beck (In re Beck), Case No 140842 (12/20/10).  The Court determined that a parent whose rights were terminated continues to have a child support  until a court modifies or terminates the obligation.
Justice Young writes (excerpt):
Because the Legislature has made a [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://domesticdiversions.com/index.php/separating-parenting-and-paying-in-re-beck/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The social network enters the courtroom</title>
		<link>http://domesticdiversions.com/index.php/the-social-network-enters-the-courtroom/</link>
		<comments>http://domesticdiversions.com/index.php/the-social-network-enters-the-courtroom/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 30 Sep 2010 15:59:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>David C. Sarnacki</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Law: Cases/Statutes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Something Different]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://domesticdiversions.com/?p=883</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Findlaw explains how your social networking postings may become subject to discovery in litigation.
Eric Sinrod writes (excerpt):
In the case of Romano v. Steelcase, a New York judge ruled that defendant Steelcase was entitled in discovery to access the plaintiff’s current and historical Facebook and MySpace pages and accounts, including previously deleted information, on the basis [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://domesticdiversions.com/index.php/the-social-network-enters-the-courtroom/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Putting a tracking device on a car: Beware</title>
		<link>http://domesticdiversions.com/index.php/putting-a-tracking-device-on-a-car-beware/</link>
		<comments>http://domesticdiversions.com/index.php/putting-a-tracking-device-on-a-car-beware/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 08 Jul 2010 20:38:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>David C. Sarnacki</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Law: Cases/Statutes]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://domesticdiversions.com/?p=860</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Any surveillance issue requires special caution and consideration before action is taken.  There are a variety of federal and state laws that may be implicated by wiretapping, eavesdropping, and electronic monitoring, and each law has its own set of remedies, damages and sanctions in the event of violation.
Michigan&#8217;s laws now include a prohibition on [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://domesticdiversions.com/index.php/putting-a-tracking-device-on-a-car-beware/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>How confidential are e-mails sent while at work?</title>
		<link>http://domesticdiversions.com/index.php/how-confidential-are-e-mails-sent-while-at-work/</link>
		<comments>http://domesticdiversions.com/index.php/how-confidential-are-e-mails-sent-while-at-work/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Dec 2009 13:30:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>David C. Sarnacki</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Law: Cases/Statutes]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://domesticdiversions.com/index.php/how-confidential-are-e-mails-sent-while-at-work/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ABAJournal.comreports on the privilege afforded to a federal prosecutor whose private e-mail to his own lawyer was sent from a government computer at work.
Martha Neil writes (excerpt):
Because he is allowed to use his work e-mail account for personal communications, assistant U.S. Attorney Jonathan Tukel had a reasonable expectation of privacy in those personal communications, explains [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://domesticdiversions.com/index.php/how-confidential-are-e-mails-sent-while-at-work/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Just how temporary is the custody awarded to Michael Jackson’s mother?</title>
		<link>http://domesticdiversions.com/index.php/just-how-temporary-is-the-custody-awarded-to-michael-jackson%e2%80%99s-mother/</link>
		<comments>http://domesticdiversions.com/index.php/just-how-temporary-is-the-custody-awarded-to-michael-jackson%e2%80%99s-mother/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 03 Jul 2009 13:18:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>David C. Sarnacki</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Law: Cases/Statutes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Something Different]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://domesticdiversions.com/index.php/just-how-temporary-is-the-custody-awarded-to-michael-jackson%e2%80%99s-mother/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The New York Times adds a little context to the looming custody issues following Michael Jackson&#8217;s death and the apparent change of heart by Debbie Rowe toward 12-year-old Michael Joseph Jackson Jr. and 11-year-old Paris Michael Katherine Jackson, 11. [An unidentified surrogate mother gave birth to 7-year-old Prince Michael Jackson II.]
Jonathan Glater and Liz Robbins [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://domesticdiversions.com/index.php/just-how-temporary-is-the-custody-awarded-to-michael-jackson%e2%80%99s-mother/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>What happens when a former spouse never changes his beneficiary designation</title>
		<link>http://domesticdiversions.com/index.php/what-happens-when-a-former-spouse-never-changes-his-beneficiary-designation/</link>
		<comments>http://domesticdiversions.com/index.php/what-happens-when-a-former-spouse-never-changes-his-beneficiary-designation/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 02 Feb 2009 20:35:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>David C. Sarnacki</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Law: Cases/Statutes]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://domesticdiversions.com/index.php/what-happens-when-a-former-spouse-never-changes-his-beneficiary-designation/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The United States Supreme Court&#8217;s decision in KENNEDY v. PLAN ADMINISTRATOR (January 26, 2009) confirms that ERISA plans must follow ERISA.  In footnote 10, the Court revealed what would happen in Michigan: the Plan would pay the former spouse, and the Estate would sue to recover the payment (constructive trust).
Justice Souter delivered the opinion [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://domesticdiversions.com/index.php/what-happens-when-a-former-spouse-never-changes-his-beneficiary-designation/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>New Rule 502: Inadvertent disclosure of attorney-client privilege and work product materials</title>
		<link>http://domesticdiversions.com/index.php/new-rule-502-inadvertent-disclosure-of-attorney-client-privilege-and-work-product-materials/</link>
		<comments>http://domesticdiversions.com/index.php/new-rule-502-inadvertent-disclosure-of-attorney-client-privilege-and-work-product-materials/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 10 Jan 2009 17:31:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>David C. Sarnacki</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Law: Cases/Statutes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Procedures/Rules]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://domesticdiversions.com/index.php/new-rule-502-inadvertent-disclosure-of-attorney-client-privilege-and-work-product-materials/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Federal Rules of Evidence will see a new rule addressing the disclosure of attorney-client and work-product information. New Rule 502 helps in those case where there are tremendous efforts to review voluminous documents and where inadvertent disclosure often occur. There is no change in the substantive law of privileges.
AMENDMENT TO THE FEDERAL RULES OF [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://domesticdiversions.com/index.php/new-rule-502-inadvertent-disclosure-of-attorney-client-privilege-and-work-product-materials/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

