Thursday, December 16, 2010

RI Judges Sworn in by Governor

RI Family Court Lawyer Alves found the following article regarding the current appointment of several judges in RI by Governor Carcieri interesting and posts it in its entirety below.



Rhode Island judges being sworn in at fast clip
Dec 14, 2010
Katie Mulvaney

PROVIDENCE, R.I.-- By the year's end, Rhode Island's newest judges will be ready to take the bench after a series of open- and closed-door swearing-in ceremonies.

At several incoming judges' requests, Governor Carcieri has held private swearing-in ceremonies in his office, according to his spokeswoman Amy Kempe. Others have opted for public ceremonies in the State Room at the State House.

Colleen M. Hastings was the first. The governor swore in Hastings the very day the state Senate approved her nomination as a District Court judge. Hastings requested the hasty ceremony so her son could witness the event before being deployed, Kempe said.

Carcieri chose Hastings, a Family Court magistrate since 2008, to replace Judge Michael A. Higgins, who retired this year. Once an assistant city solicitor in Newport, Hastings served as assistant legal counsel to then-Senate Majority Leader M. Teresa Paiva Weed from 2006 to 2008.

The governor swore in District Court Magistrate Christine S. Jabour as a District Court judge in a private ceremony in his office Dec. 8, Kempe said. Jabour replaces Stephen E. Erickson, who retired in June after 20 years on the bench.

Jabour, of Barrington, has worked as a District Court magistrate since 2003. She is a sister of Sen. Paul V. Jabour, D-Providence, and is married to former Judicial Nominating Commission Chairman Girard R. Visconti.

Walter R. Stone was sworn in privately the same day to replace O. Rogeriee Thompson on the Superior Court bench. A former prosecutor who once ran for state attorney general, Stone, of Providence, has practiced law for 35 years and was a partner at Adler, Pollock & Sheehan.

Two days later, the governor swore in Haiganush R. Bedrosian as chief of the state's Family Court. Bedrosian, who is the first woman to lead the court, has been served on Family Court since 1980.

A public ceremony with 700 guests will take place for Bedrosian at 3 p.m., Friday, at Warwick City Hall, Kempe said.

Stephen M. Isherwood's swearing in as District Court judge took place at 3 p.m. Tuesday in a public ceremony in the State Room. Isherwood fills the seat left open when Jeanne E. LaFazia became chief judge of the District Court. Isherwood has been a Probate Court judge in Warwick since 2005. He has worked at a Cranston law firm since 1994.

Narragansett lawyer Brian Van Couyghen will be sworn in Dec. 21 in a private ceremony to fill the Superior Court seat once held by Supreme Court Judge Gilbert V. Indeglia. Van Couyghen has served as legislative counsel to the state House of Representatives and the state Senate since 2001. He has been a trial lawyer since 1984.

Van Couyghen is Carcieri's wife Suzanne's brother's wife's first cousin, Kempe said.

And finally, Sarah Taft-Carter will be sworn in as a Superior Court judge at a public event in the State Room at 3:30 p.m. that same day, Kempe said. Taft-Carter will take the seat held by Alice B. Gibney before Gibney became presiding justice of the Superior Court. She is daughter of a former Cranston mayor, James L. Taft Jr., and is a partner with Taft & McSally LLP in Cranston.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you have questions about this posting or are interested in Divorce, Immigration, or Estate Law in RI or MA contact Massachusetts and Rhode Island Divorce Lawyer Rui P. Alves at 401-942-3100 or CONTACT him via email.

Friday, December 10, 2010

Undocumented Students Aim of Recent Immigration Reform

RI Immigration Attorney posts recent article regarding Immigration reform in the United States and what this means for those who are students here in this country. The article discusses the proposed reform that would allow hundreds of thousands of undocumented students in this country to remain to finish their educations.

The full article follows below.


Vote on DREAM Act is scheduled soon
December 8, 2010

While Democrats struggle to find enough votes to make a federal immigration reform bill a reality, members of the Immigrants Coalition of Inland Southern California gathered on the steps of San Bernardino City Hall last week to urge local elected officials to support a proposal that would legalize hundreds of thousands of undocumented students.

Despite the fact that the proposed bill faces long odds, supporters hope the Development, Relief, and Education for Alien Minors Act (DREAM Act) will pass in order to allow thousands of people who arrived to the United States as minors a path to legalization and eventual naturalization.

"We call for Congress not to betray the hopes and dreams of thousands of young people across the nation who are counting on their support," said Emilio Amaya, executive director at the San Bernardino Community Services Center.

Supporters of the DREAM Act also ask legislators to not support amendments that would deny young permanent residents or citizens the right to petition for family members, deny them in-state-tuition, and mandate the use of E-verify, a "flawed and costly system which would cause numerous workers, immigrant and non-immigrant alike to lose their jobs."

"We expect our senators and members of Congress to do everything in their power to move the DREAM Act forward in its present form, without amendments that would harm thousands of families and exacerbate the pain caused by an already broken immigration system," said Moises Escalante, chairman of the Coalition.

Many Republicans and some Democrats have opposed the DREAM Act, saying it would amount of amnesty for illegal immigrants.

Among the estimated 825,000 persons that would benefit from the DREAM Act is 23-year-old Veronica Briones, who arrived in the United States 20 years ago together with her mother as they escaped a violent and abusive father from Mexico.

Briones, a Riverside Community College student, is one of 553,000 possible candidates who live in California. A mother of a little girl, Briones hopes government gives her an opportunity to demonstrate her loyalty to the nation by allowing her to finish her upper education.

"Let us demonstrate that we are here to work and be good citizens. Let us demonstrate that we are not criminals, as some people portray us. Give us the chance and we would use it to finish school. We could be the next doctors, lawyers, architects, engineers, nurses, and teachers," Briones pledged to both the Senate and House of Representatives. "Don't close the doors on us ... don't kill our dreams."

The DREAM Act has some support in the House but faces a much bigger hurdle at the Senate, where, as of Dec. 7, it did not have the 60 votes required to pass.

According to reports, the Senate was set to vote on it on Wednesday. If the bill is signed into law by President Barack Obama, who supports it, it would allow legalization and a path to naturalization to those undocumented residents who either attend or enlist in the military; those who arrived to this country before the age of 16 and are under 35; and those who can demonstrate good moral standing.

While some people call the DREAM Act a form of amnesty that would drain government funds and throw American students who are citizens off universities and colleges, others see it as a way to bolster the economy. Secretary of Commerce Gary Locke said on a letter to Congress that the DREAM Act would allow current students to fulfill their goals in life and possibly create the new Google or Intel.

Local legislators, including Jerry Lewis (R-Redlands) and Mary Bono Mack (R-Palm Springs), among others, will not vote in favor of the DREAM Act as it stands, their offices said. Other legislators, such as David Dreier (R-San Dimas), have not announced a decision yet.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you have questions about this posting or are interested in Divorce, Immigration, or Estate Law in RI or MA contact Massachusetts and Rhode Island Divorce Lawyer Rui P. Alves at 401-942-3100 or CONTACT him via email.

Thursday, December 9, 2010

Divorce Facts You May Not Like to Hear

Staying married and working on your relationship is easier than getting divorced.

In most cases, this fact is true. If you and your spouse have children, this particular fact can be considered the truest of them all, because even if you are both able to rise above your differences and work together for the benefit of the children, they will still be affected by the split.

And in almost every instance, men remarry within 1 to 3 years following a divorce, and women within 5 years, if at all. In each case, parties stated that if they’d known how difficult the divorce process would be, financially and emotionally, they would have worked a lot harder at their marriage and made the changes to stay together.

Remember, whatever you refuse to deal with in your marriage, will still be there after your divorce. You will have to look at it, and deal with it, before you can have another relationship with someone new anyway. Why not make the attempt to change what needs changing and see what happens before giving up completely? If you and your partner can obtain counseling before the marriage is at the point of no return, do so.

You are going to have to consider selling the house.

This is true more often than people realize, and depending upon what state you live in, the Court may even order that the marital domicile be sold with the proceeds split; particularly if one spouse cannot buy out the other in equity.

If you and your spouse can come to an agreement that the Judge will allow, and you can each afford to maintain an adequate and comfortable lifestyle both for yourselves and any children involved, you may be able to work something out that allows one party to stay in the house (typically with the children), while the other helps with mortgage payments until the remaining spouse is able to either obtain their own mortgage or come up with an equity payment to give the other partner.

It is very rare for a Judge to both award the house and children to one spouse and require the other spouse to pay the mortgage and child support as well. If you cannot afford to keep the house on one paycheck and still live comfortably, you are going to have to sell the house.


You will go to jail for failure to pay child support.

There are a lot of people out there falling on hard times between unemployment and dwindling jobs in certain areas of the country. If you have a court order that states you must pay a certain amount of child support to your spouse, or if your support is court ordered to be removed from your wages, and you fail to pay in either instance, you will be in contempt of court.

In the situation where the amount is simply paid to your former spouse, you can, perhaps, work out an agreement that will not require court intervention to allow you to pay a smaller amount every week, and catch up at a time when you are in a better position to do so.

However, if you have a garnishment, or your payment goes directly through the court, if you do not file a motion with the court to reduce or suspend your child support during periods of unemployment, you will create an arrearage of back support that will need to be paid or you will be arrested and put in jail until you are able to pay. When the court discovers that your payments have not been made, they will issue a warrant, and you will be arrested for non-payment of child support.


Getting Both Alimony and Child Support is a Dwindling Statistic

This is another true statement. In almost 85% of divorce cases, alimony, or spousal support, is not awarded. And if you are receiving child support payments, you can expect the amount you might receive to be reduced by that amount as well.

There are some exceptions of course. In cases where a wife has put a husband through school for instance, or has stayed home to care for children in a marriage of at least 10 years, the wife will have a chance of collecting some alimony. That is, at least until she can re-enter the workforce full-time or retrain with new skills. And if she has paid his way through school, and has proof, she will be reimbursed in almost every instance for her contribution to his education, whether there are children in the marriage or not.

With the cost of living being so high, and so many women not even receiving full and regular child support payments, alimony has become a definite ‘luxury’ item decision in divorce cases involving minor children. The Court’s stance seems to be, everyone can work.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you have questions about this posting or are interested in Divorce, Immigration, or Estate Law in RI or MA contact Massachusetts and Rhode Island Divorce Lawyer Rui P. Alves at 401-942-3100 or CONTACT him via email.

Wednesday, December 8, 2010

Immigration Reform and the US Food Supply

RI Immigration Attorney Rui P. Alves found this article regarding the current surge of Immigration reform and the eventual part these new guidelines will play in closing businesses across the country as workers are determined to be illegally in the country and are deported from the US.

With the least insight of all, the ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) department is sweeping through agricultural businesses imposing fines and firing employees, and causing hardship, destruction of lives, and the possibility of food production and supply issues in the future.

The full article follows below.


Special report: Aggressive crackdowns on illegal immigration can backfire if they hurt business
Lesson learned: Don't upset business
By CHRIS COLLINS
The Fresno Bee

Brian Poulsen fought on the front lines of America's war against illegal immigration for three decades. He patrolled the border near San Diego on horseback, grew a ragged beard to disguise himself as a human smuggler, arrested and deported thousands of illegal immigrants, and tracked down fake document vendors at local flea markets.

His job description was clear: Do everything you can to stop illegal immigrants from coming and kick them out if they get here.

But Poulsen and other agents have discovered it's not easy to enforce immigration laws -- especially those that target employers.

Aggressive crackdowns can backfire if they hurt business. A sweep of Midwestern meatpacking plants in the late 1990s, for example, prompted outrage from business and civic leaders. Immigration officials have learned to tread lightly.

Poulsen, who retired this year as the top immigration enforcement official in the central San Joaquin Valley, tried to strike a balance between stopping illegal immigration and protecting farmers' interests. His office rarely conducted audits, never issued a fine and avoided messy, high-profile raids that would permanently shut down a business and separate families.

"There's a little bit of a tightrope. I understand where the farmers are coming from," said Poulsen, who grew up harvesting potatoes in Idaho. "You don't want to see people go out of business, but at the same time, we're sworn to do a job and can't look the other way."

Things may be changing: The Obama administration has stepped up the pace of audits, which are less likely to spark a backlash than workplace raids. For example, of 16 audits conducted in the central San Joaquin Valley over the past eight years, 11 have come since late 2008.

Some agriculture leaders in the Valley are worried about the audits, which can hurt businesses by making them fire all their illegal workers.

But government figures show that the new effort is tame compared to the early 1990s, when immigration officials fined about 900 companies a year and audited thousands. This year, they fined 237.

Many experts say aggressively cracking down on employers will rid the nation of illegal immigrants. Because the vast majority of them come here to work, America would be a much less appealing destination without job opportunities.

But advocates for stricter enforcement say there is little political appetite to sever the co-dependent relationship between businesses and illegal immigrants.

And aggressive enforcement, agents have learned, can backfire.

In the late 1990s, in response to calls for tougher enforcement, the U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service -- which later became Immigration and Customs Enforcement -- blanketed Midwestern meat-packing companies with audits that identified thousands of employees suspected of being illegal immigrants.

Frightened workers left in droves, slowing slaughter-line speeds to a crawl and hurting farmers who relied on the meat-packing businesses.

"All hell broke loose," said Mark Reed, a former top INS official who was in charge of the crackdown, dubbed Operation Vanguard. "All of a sudden, these communities that wanted these people out of there realized that they needed them.

They didn't realize that the kids who played on their soccer teams and the people they went to church with were going to go. They didn't realize that they were the center of their economy." Nebraska's governor and members of Congress intervened. Operation Vanguard -- which was scheduled to expand to the rest of the country -- was nipped in the bud.

During the waning years of the Bush administration, immigration agents grabbed headlines by raiding companies and deporting workers. The raids across the country drew controversy, just as Operation Vanguard did a decade earlier.

The Obama administration decided to take a different approach.

In April 2009, ICE issued a memo that downplayed the importance of raids, noting that they did little to prove that employers knowingly hired illegal immigrants.

Instead, it hired scores of auditors and directed them to build cases against businesses. If an audit shows that a business employed illegal immigrants, the owner must fire them to avoid fines of up to $3,200 for each illegal worker -- or prison time.

In 2006, ICE spent just 2 percent of its staff time on worksite enforcement, and not a single company was fined for hiring illegal immigrants. This year, it audited 2,196 businesses and fined 237.

Still, ICE spent only about 5 percent of its staff time on worksite enforcement through April -- less than a fourth of the time it spent on drug smuggling.

Manuel Cunha, president of the Fresno-based Nisei Farmers League, an association of agriculture businesses in the Western U.S., said ICE audited four growers in his association last year, forcing them to fire many of their workers. He described it as a farmer's "worst nightmare." "It was like Satan came to their door and said, 'We're taking your children because you know what? Your children sinned,'" Cunha said. "These farmers knew these workers. They were part of their community. They were part of their families. You yank them out, what does that do to that industry? To those farmers? To those workers?"

Mike Saqui, a Sacramento immigration attorney for businesses, said an audit can be destructive for businesses. One client who was audited in the middle of harvest-time last year had to fire 269 of his 280 field workers.

If ICE wanted to use audits to get agriculture employers' attention, it worked. Cunha said growers worry about audits "every day now." Yet some doubt the administration's audit strategy will succeed.

Reed, the former INS official who now runs an immigration consultant firm in Tucson, Ariz., said ICE should take a more comprehensive strategy and audit all companies in a region in the same industry instead of its current "hodgepodge" approach. Otherwise, he said, businesses will continue to hire illegal immigrants because they believe there's little risk of an audit.

Philip Martin, an immigration and farm labor expert at the University of California, Davis, said another question is whether the administration will follow its strategy consistently.

"So far, it hasn't been sustained long enough for it to have a significant effect," he said. "That's the big question: Is it going to be sustained?" Audits aren't the only thing employers are worried about. Immigration officials are deporting illegal immigrants -- many of them working for farmers or construction companies -- at a record pace. In the 2009-10 fiscal year, they deported 393,000 -- almost twice as many as four years earlier.

Much of the focus has been on deporting illegal immigrants suspected or convicted of crimes. But others often are swept up in such efforts.

That is what happened in Mendota during a February 2007 raid that was criticized by some local officials. Mendota officials said it took residents about a year to recover and the local economy suffered. Former Fresno mayor Alan Autry criticized ICE for being "mind-boggling in its callousness." Erik Bonnar, the deputy field office director who supervises deportations in the San Joaquin Valley, said agents couldn't ignore the fact that some residents were illegal immigrants.

"If our officers determine that they're here illegally, then they'll take them into custody," he said.

More recently, ICE started a program in 2007 called Secure Communities that has attracted growing attention. It uses fingerprints to determine whether jail inmates are illegal immigrants, which often leads to their deportation.

Fresno, Tulare and Merced counties joined the rapidly expanding program this year. Because of jail overcrowding, however, many illegal immigrants arrested for misdemeanor crimes are not booked in jail.


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you have questions about this posting or are interested in Divorce, Immigration, or Estate Law in RI or MA contact Massachusetts and Rhode Island Divorce Lawyer Rui P. Alves at 401-942-3100 or CONTACT him via email.

Wednesday, December 1, 2010

Child Returned to Mother as Custodial Parent After Hearing

Child Custody Case Results posted by RI Family Court Attorney Rui P. Alves.


Case Results for RI Child Custody Matter


Father obtained order removing son from mother. Mother was the primary care taker of child. Obtained order returning child to mother prior to court date by demonstrating to the Court that father’s allegations were baseless. Action resolved with mother being the custodial parent of the child.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you have questions about this posting or are interested in Divorce, Immigration, or Estate Law in RI or MA contact Massachusetts and Rhode Island Divorce Lawyer Rui P. Alves at 401-942-3100 or CONTACT him via email.

Wednesday, November 17, 2010

Immigration Law Precedent Set by the USCIS

RI Divorce and Immigration Attorney Alves found this article concerning the recent precents set by the US Citizenship and Immigration Services. The full article follows below.


USCIS Issues Two Precedent Appeals Decisions
WASHINGTON—U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) today announced that it has issued two decisions from the USCIS Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) as binding precedent for the agency. These decisions will provide guidance to USCIS adjudicators and help deliver predictability to the public. AAO precedent decisions result from a collaboration between the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), which publishes the cases.
"The issuance of AAO precedent decisions honors USCIS’s commitment to the clear and consistent application of the immigration laws," said USCIS Director Alejandro Mayorkas. "We are grateful for the Justice Department’s partnership in our efforts to promote predictability in immigration-benefits cases." USCIS is committed to issuing further precedent decisions going forward, given their value to the agency and the public.
An AAO precedent decision is an immigration-appeals case that DHS, with the Attorney General’s concurrence, designates as establishing a rule for deciding future cases. Once published by DOJ, AAO precedent decisions bind all DHS personnel in the administration of the immigration laws. DOJ publishes the decisions in the bound volumes of the "Administrative Decisions Under Immigration and Nationality Laws of the United States" (I&N Dec.), which also contain the precedent decisions of the DOJ’s Board of Immigration Appeals.
The first decision affirms USCIS’s denial of an application to adjust status to permanent residence and holds that an employment-based petition must be "valid" initially if it is to "remain valid with respect to a new job." The second decision reverses USCIS’s denial of an application to preserve residence for naturalization purposes and clarifies the definition of employment by an "American firm or corporation."
For more information on USCIS and its programs, visit www.uscis.gov.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you have questions about this posting or are interested in Divorce, Immigration, or Estate Law in RI or MA contact Massachusetts and Rhode Island Divorce Lawyer Rui P. Alves at 401-942-3100 or CONTACT him via email.

Sunday, November 7, 2010

Credit Card Debt in RI Divorce

RI Divorce Attorney Rui P. Alves posts the following Family Court case results:

RI Family Court Case Results - DIVORCE

Husband and Wife divorce after many years of marriage. Husband wasted money on drugs and other non-marital purchases. As a result, the Husband accumulated credit card and other debts for large sums of money. When the parties were finally divorced, the Husband was responsible for 100% of the debts. Wife was also awarded 50% of Husband’s pension.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you have questions about this posting or are interested in Divorce, Immigration, or Estate Law in RI or MA contact Massachusetts and Rhode Island Divorce Lawyer Rui P. Alves at 401-942-3100 or CONTACT him via email.

Tuesday, November 2, 2010

US Immigration Reform Topics Spark More Debate

Immigration reform has become a prevalent topic in the United States. Even here in RI, Immigration is taking the forefront in everything from new immigration laws, to mayoral debates, to voting boycotts by minority groups.

The most common incidences of immigration violation occur for people who have entered the country legally with a valid visa, and then simply overstay the limit on their visa and forget to renew it for any number of reasons.

The distinction between criminal activity and civil immigration violations is such that even the Immigration and Naturalization Service has made undocumented accusations of criminal allegations libelous or slanderous, and the other a civil infraction comparable to accidental damage of the property of another.

If you're visa is about to expire, or you need help with the immigration paperwork to file for a green card or extend your work permit or visa, do not wait until the last minute. Immigration filings take time and the government rejects incomplete applications immediately. Protect yourself and seek the expertise and guidance of an attorney with experience in Immigration proceedings.

The following article highlights some of the debates raging across the country about valid and controversial immigration reform movements.



Immigration Reform: Hispanic Don’t Vote Ads Wont Be Aired
By Victor Hatley
October 23, 2010

The Hispanic group, Latinos For Reform, has launched a national campaign instructing Hispanics nationwide to avoid the polls on November 2nd, and the advertising firm, Univision, has refused to sell them air time for the campaign. The group’s ad claims that because of the broken promise of immigration reform, that Hispanic voters shouldn’t vote in any congressional elections, only state and local.

Univision’s Statement On The Subject

In their statement, much of which was also tweeted on the company site, they asserted that while the group’s leader, Robert de Posada, had appeared in several commentaries and other programming, he was not affiliated with Univision. They said “Univision will not be running any spots from Latinos for Reform related to voting. It is also important to clarify that while Mr. Robert de Posada has on occasion provided political commentary on Univision, representing one of various points of views, he is not in any way affiliated with Univision.” The statement went on to claim that the group was promoting a no vote stance, they are proud about “promoting civic engagement and our extensive national campaigns encourage Hispanics to vote.”
What The Ad Says

My Spanish is weak, so I listened to the English version. The group claims that “Last time, President Obama and the Democratic leadership made a commitment that immigration reform would be passed within a year. But two years have gone by and nothing. Not even a vote in Congress.” They assert that with the Democratic majority, something should have been done by now. Their ad ends saying “Democratic leaders must pay for their broken promises and betrayals.” The narrator ends saying, “Don’t vote this November. This is the only way to send them a clear message. You can no longer take us for granted. Don’t vote.”

While I can understand the frustration of the Hispanic communities, the legal individuals should understand that the vote they have is part of their voice in who, what, and why of how this government works. Also of note is the fact that the ad never mentions Republican oppositionism and their resistance to everything Obama or Democrat.


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you have questions about this posting or are interested in Divorce, Immigration, or Estate Law in RI or MA contact Massachusetts and Rhode Island Divorce Lawyer Rui P. Alves at 401-942-3100 or CONTACT him via email.

Monday, November 1, 2010

Personal Injury Proceeds Pay Child Support Arrearage

RI Family Lawyers Alves Law Offices handle all cases involving Divorce, Custody, Child Support and more.

Case Results for RI Family Court -RI Child Support

Father failed to pay child support. Father was to receive money from settlement of personal injury action. Obtained restaining order to prevent father from receiving settlement money. All of the settlement money used to pay past child support due to mother.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you have questions about this posting or are interested in Divorce, Immigration, or Estate Law in RI or MA contact Massachusetts and Rhode Island Divorce Lawyer Rui P. Alves at 401-942-3100 or CONTACT him via email.

Thursday, October 28, 2010

Equitable Division of Assets in RI Divorce Case

RI Divorce Attorney Alves posts decision in a Family Court Divorce Proceeding involving the equitable division of the marital assets.


RI Divorce Case Results

Wife worked in the home for many years. Husband did not want divide his business and/or real estate to give to wife. Wife awarded a cash lump sum of money to compensate for her equitable interest in the marital estate.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you have questions about this posting or are interested in Divorce, Immigration, or Estate Law in RI or MA contact Massachusetts and Rhode Island Divorce Lawyer Rui P. Alves at 401-942-3100 or CONTACT him via email.

Wednesday, October 27, 2010

Immigration Case Backlog in Houston Court

RI Immigration Attorney Alves posts the following article concerning the Houston immigration court and the clearing of its dockets. The immigration cases being thrown out are related to matters that do not involve criminal activity or are not pressing in terms of public safety. The courts claim it is an effort to whittle down their docket which reaches into 2012, however, supporters of the new laws claim it is an attempt to by-pass certain aspects at an attempt to support the Obama administrations amnesty actions.

Immigration Courts Tossing Out Record-High Number of Cases
By Elise Foley
10/18/10

Houston immigration judges are throwing out an unprecedented number of cases after an internal review of the city’s immigration court docket, the Houston Chronicle reported yesterday. That means many non-criminal illegal immigrants are more likely to be released: About 200 immigration cases have been dismissed per month since the review began, up from an average of 38 per month. The policy change, which ICE officials have avoided discussing, seems to be an attempt to deal with large backlogs in the immigration courts, which are already scheduling hearings into 2012.

Why are some cases dismissed? The answers differ: Although ICE claims only cases involving pending petitions for illegal immigrants by U.S. citizens would be considered, others claim the guidelines are more broad. Raed Gonzalez, liaison for the Justice Department’s Executive Office for Immigration Review with the American Immigration Lawyers Association, told the Chronicle judges were given authority to dismiss immigration cases for a number of other reasons:

Government attorneys in Houston were instructed to exercise prosecutorial discretion on a case-by-case basis for illegal immigrants who have lived in the U.S. for at least two years and have no serious criminal history, Gonzalez said.

To qualify for dismissal, defendants also must have no felony record or any misdemeanor convictions involving DWI, sex crimes or domestic violence, he said. [...]

By moving to dismiss cases for people who have stayed out of trouble, the agency will be better able to use its limited resources to more rapidly deport those with serious criminal records, supporters said.

On the other side, though, supporters of tougher immigration enforcement have claimed the review is an effort at backdoor amnesty by the Obama administration. It’s an argument many anti-illegal immigration groups have made before, but it is worth noting that despite dismissals, deportation is still on the rise under the administration.


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you have questions about this posting or are interested in Divorce, Immigration, or Estate Law in RI or MA contact Massachusetts and Rhode Island Divorce Lawyer Rui P. Alves at 401-942-3100 or CONTACT him via email.

Friday, October 22, 2010

Benefits of Becoming a Legal US Citizens

Under the Immigration and Naturalization Act, when you become a United States Citizen you then become eligible for certain privileges that are not available to you while you are holding your green card.

When you have satisfied the criteria that will provide you with eligibility for naturalization, specifically, that you are a married Legal Permanent Resident and your green card was secured as a result of this marriage, you may file an application for Citizenship three years following the issuance of your green card.

If you are a Legal Permanent Resident who did not obtain their green card through marriage, then you will become eligible for naturalization five years after you receive your green card.

Some of the advantages of becoming a US Citizen include:

  • No longer being able to be deported from the US, and not having to show proof of residency or any immigration documentation to re-enter the country after leaving.
  • Vote, serve on a jury, and become eligible for government grants and education financing.
  • And bring family members to the United States, and secure citizenship for children who were born abroad.

If you are considering obtaining a green card or applying for citizenship, contact Rui P. Alves for more information.




----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you have questions about this posting or are interested in Divorce, Immigration, or Estate Law in RI or MA contact Massachusetts and Rhode Island Divorce Lawyer Rui P. Alves at 401-942-3100 or CONTACT him via email.

Wednesday, October 20, 2010

Divorce, Children, and the Marital Domicile

Most divorce cases being determined at this time have issues that are settled long before ever stepping foot in the courtroom. In fact, the vast majority of cases are settled without the need for a trial as parents and divorcing couples come to realize that settling out of court avoids not only hefty legal fees, but also a tremendous amount of stress, anxiety and shared trauma.

These cases are also marked by the determination of each party to resolve their difference amicably, and in particular, those things which relate to the welfare of their children.

The marital domicile is the major investment that most couples will make in their lifetime. Owing to this fact, the court does not take the separation of it lightly. If the party who wishes to reside in the home with the children, is financially able to do so, and the situation will continue to be in the best interest of the children, the court will often allow the parties to defer selling the house.

However, the party remaining in the home will have to agree to sign a mortgage for the equity in the home, or that they will buy out the other spouse when it becomes financially feasible to do so. The court will ensure this process is undertaken strictly, by appraising the value and equity of the home. If a couple disagrees with the value that the court assigns, they may always hire their own appraiser.

Additionally, if there is a substantial change in the circumstances of either spouse, but in particular the spouse who remains in the house, the court will re-evaluate and redetermine whether deferring the sale of the property is still a good solution for all involved. If it is determined that the remaining spouse is now either able to buy out the vacating party, or buy another home, the court may order the marital domicile sold.

The only way to be sure that you are forming a fair agreement, is to seek the counsel of a qualified domestic relations and divorce attorney in RI.


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you have questions about this posting or are interested in Divorce, Immigration, or Estate Law in RI or MA contact Massachusetts and Rhode Island Divorce Lawyer Rui P. Alves at 401-942-3100 or CONTACT him via email.

Thursday, September 30, 2010

Father's Rights in Family Court

Does the RI Family Court take away a father's constitutional rights?

It is well noted that the family court system is not structured to cater to the wishes of the parents, but to the welfare of the child. Does this structure jeopardize the basic and fundamental rights of parents, in particular father's rights, when it comes to decisions relating to their children?

The right to a trial by jury is one of the only ways to ensure fairness in legal proceedings. Yet, family court does not employ the use of juries at hearings.

In addition to the violation of this Constitutional right, other fundamental constitutional rights with regard to our children are also at stake, such as:

the right to parent your child
the right to decide your career and control your income
the right to protect and maintain your passport for travel, and any driver's licenses or professional licenses

A Family Court decision is rendered solely by the Judge. Because of this, if you are ordered to be the non-custodial parent, you will lose your right to have any input into the direction of their lives, will not be able to live with them or support them directly, and will be forced to pay child support or be sent to jail without a trial for defaulting.

You need not do anything wrong to be assigned as the non-custodial parent. The tradition that mothers make the better custodial parent is rooted in the times when men worked long hours outside the home and women stayed home. Because our lifestyles have now changed and most women work outside the home as well, it no longer applies that the mother would solely be the best fit for the child.

While the 'best interest of the child' is certainly a concern for every parent, it is a fit parent, not the state, that according to Supreme Court case law is the best choice for the welfare of the child.

If you are facing a divorce where there is a custody issue at stake, and you would like more choices regarding your children, see a RI family court attorney immediately.




----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you have questions about this posting or are interested in Divorce, Immigration, or Estate Law in RI or MA contact Massachusetts and Rhode Island Divorce Lawyer Rui P. Alves at 401-942-3100 or CONTACT him via email.

Thursday, September 23, 2010

Terminating Child Support and Wage Garnishment in RI

RI Law does not provide for the automatic termination of child support. Rather, a Motion to Terminate Child Support must be heard and granted by a Judge of the Family Court before the original and standing support order will be modified or dropped.

Unlike when filing for a divorce however, the parties are not required to provide the family court with a DR6 unless there is more than one child and support must continue for the remaining children.

Consequently, if there is more than one child involved, the motion will not be for the termination of child support, it will be for the modification of child support. To file a Motion to Modify Child Support, the parties do need to present current income and expense information in the form of a DR6.

When a supported child reaches the maximum age of 19 or graduates from high school, whichever arrives first, child support may be terminated. Under special circumstances involving disable children, support may continue beyond the age of 19 up to the age of 21, or if good cause is found, to as much as 3 months after high school.

A motion to terminate child support needs to be filed with the court in advance of the child's graduation date, or the child's 18th birthday.

Depending upon how busy the court is, the motion may not be heard for 30-40 days. Following the hearing, it is imperative that your attorney file the necessary documents and paperwork to effectively terminate the support order. Until this process is completely, you only have in essence a court order, and support will continue to be deducted until a wage garnishing authority is told otherwise.

If you or someone you know would like to terminate child support payments for a child who is 18 or older, or would like to modify child support payments in RI, contact my office for a convenient appointment at (401) 942-3100 or by email at rpa@alveslaw.com

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you have questions about this posting or are interested in Divorce, Immigration, or Estate Law in RI or MA contact Massachusetts and Rhode Island Divorce Lawyer Rui P. Alves at 401-942-3100 or CONTACT him via email.

Wednesday, September 1, 2010

RI Family Court Chief Justice Interviews Begin

RI Divorce Lawyer Rui P. Alves found this article informative concerning the appointment of a new RI Family Court chief justice.

Interviews to begin for RI Family Court chief justice
By Elisabeth Harrison (2010-08-10)
PROVIDENCE, R.I. (WRNI) - Interviews begin today for a new chief justice to lead the Rhode Island Family Court. Several groups have recently criticized the court and its outgoing chief justice Jeremiah Jeremiah.

Jeremiah is the target of an ACLU lawsuit that alleges the court's truancy program violates due process rights for children and families. A report released earlier this year by the Coalition Against Domestic Violence also criticized the court.

Anne Grant, an author and advocate for domestic abuse victims, says many alleged abusers get joint custody because it is expensive and time consuming to pursue a case against them.

"And its not just he said she said, because some of the cases I wrote about, there were hospital records and police records to show that the children were being exposed and the mother was being beaten," Grant said. "And yet, the children ended up going to the father."

Some advocates have praised Jeremiah for embracing some recommendations, such as a training session on domestic abuse for family court workers.

The judicial nominating commission will interview 6 candidates to replace Jeremiah and submit a recommendation to the governor.


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you have questions about this posting or are interested in Divorce, Immigration, or Estate Law in RI or MA contact Massachusetts and Rhode Island Divorce Lawyer Rui P. Alves at 401-942-3100 or CONTACT him via email.

Tuesday, August 31, 2010

Working Mom's Face Custody Issues in Divorce Proceedings in RI

The issue of who will have physical custody of the children in RI divorce proceedings has just gotten a lot more complex as a result of more and more women having to work longer hours to support their children alone.

In a tragic turn-around, single mothers who have to work longer hours to support their children, are now being faced with the prospect of losing custody of their children due to the fact that they need to be absent from the home for extended periods of time in order to earn enough money to meet the needs of their family.

In the past, this issue seemed to be reserved solely for fathers who were generally out of the home working for a good portion of the day. This new adjustment in the criteria places the children at most risk.

Sadly, the statement being made here is that neither parent will be in a position to care for their children unless they are able to live together and work together to support them. Making a living as a solo parent and provider takes more and more hours in order to provide even a moderate standard of living.

In multi-child households, the task becomes almost impossible, and if the custodial parent is working for a minimal hourly wage, chances are good that they will need to be absent from the home for longer than the courts in the State of RI will consider acceptable for physical custody consideration.

If you are a single parent in RI, or are in the process of a divorce proceeding or custody issue in RI, contact an experience Family Law Attorney immediately for assistance and consultation.



----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you have questions about this posting or are interested in Divorce, Immigration, or Estate Law in RI or MA contact Massachusetts and Rhode Island Divorce Lawyer Rui P. Alves at 401-942-3100 or CONTACT him via email.

Friday, August 27, 2010

Child Visitation Via Skype in NY Family Court Decision

A Long Island NY mother wins the right to move to Florida as long as the father is allowed visitation with the children via Skype. RI Family Court Visitation and Divorce Attorney Rui P. Alves posts the full article below.



Judge Orders Skype Visits as Condition of Mom’s Move
By Molly McDonough
Aug 12, 2010

A New York judge has ordered that a Long Island mother make her two children available to talk to their father via Skype, an online video conferencing service, as a condition of her move to Florida.

This is the first time such a condition has been made on a case in New York, theNew York Law Journal reports. But last year, the New York Times reported that a number of states have begun allowing for "virtual visitation," giving judges the option to keep non-custodial parents in contact with their children via e-mail, instant messaging and Web cams.

In the New York case, Suffolk County Supreme Court Justice Jerry Garguilo, inBaker v. Baker, ordered that the mother, at her own expense, "will see to it, prior to re-location, that the Respondent, as well as the children, are provided the appropriate internet access via a Skype device which allows a real time broadcast of communications between the Respondent and his children."

The couple has been divorced since 2008 and the mother, who is unemployed, is planning to move to Florida where she can live with her parents and find work.

In granting the mother's request over the father's objections to his children moving, Garguilo noted that common sense makes clear that a move aimed at finding a better way to support the family is necessary.


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you have questions about this posting or are interested in Divorce, Immigration, or Estate Law in RI or MA contact Massachusetts and Rhode Island Divorce Lawyer Rui P. Alves at 401-942-3100 or CONTACT him via email.

Wednesday, August 25, 2010

RI Immigration Laws to Follow Arizona Lead

RI Immigration Attorney Rui Alves reports the following article concerning a proposed change to the RI Immigration laws that would mimic the current Arizona Immigration laws. The AZ laws have been ruled against by a Federal Court after a lawsuit was filed by the Presidential administration. The full article concerning these landmark and precedent setting decisions in Immigration law follows below.

Nearly Half of United States Considering Arizona-Style Immigration Legislation
August 19, 2010
By Fred Lucas, Staff Writer


(CNSNews.com) – Twenty-two states are now in the process of drafting or seeking to pass legislation similar to Arizona’s law against illegal immigration. This is occurring despite the fact that the Obama administration has filed a lawsuit against the Arizona law and a federal judge has ruled against portions of that law – a ruling that is now being appealed.

Next month, two Rhode Island state lawmakers, a Democrat and a Republican, will travel to Arizona to speak with Republican Gov. Jan Brewer, local sheriffs, and other officials about how to better craft their own bipartisan immigration bill for Rhode Island, which already has been enforcing some federal immigration laws.

Meanwhile, 11 Republican state lawmakers from Colorado traveled to Arizona this week to meet with officials there on how to craft legislation for the Mile High state.

In addition, Alabama House Republicans announced this week that they would seek to “push an illegal immigration bill similar to the recently approved Arizona law.” This law would “create a new criminal trespass statute that allows local law enforcement to arrest illegal immigrants for simply setting foot in Alabama,” said Alabama’s House Minority Leader Mike Hubbard.

In Florida, proposed legislation against illegal immigration has been retooled to address some concerns raised by a federal judge who blocked the bill, though it would still allow Florida state police to enforce immigration law.

In all, there are 22 states considering copycat legislation from the Arizona law against illegal immigration, according to the Americans for Legal Immigration Political Action Committee (ALIPAC), a group that advocates for stricter immigration enforcement.


The law prohibits racial profiling and gives state residents the right to sue local agencies for not complying with the state law.

In the lawsuit challenging the Arizona law, the Obama administration said the United States should not have a “patchwork” of 50 different immigration laws. In late July, U.S. District Judge Susna Bolton ruled against most of the major elements of the Arizona law, halting their implementation. That ruling is now in the appeals process.

“We do not expand on federal law,” Florida state Rep. William Snyder, sponsor of the bill in his state, told CNSNews.com. “We do not change penalties. The goal is not to create a new immigration framework at the state level.”

Snyder, the chairman of the Florida House Criminal Justice Committee, said his staff attorneys have taken the decision by U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton into consideration in re-crafting their bill for the next state legislative session.

Snyder said the office of state Attorney General Bill McCollum has reviewed the legislation, as has committee attorneys, and they believe it will withstand a potential legal challenge from the Obama administration.

McCollum, a GOP candidate for governor, supports the legislation. However, Gov. Charlie Crist, a Republican-turned-Independent candidate for U.S. Senate, opposes the proposal.


In Rhode Island, a bill that was introduced late in the session last year, and thus never reached a vote, is expected to be reintroduced in the 2011 session. Its two lead co-sponsors hope to have a bipartisan bill that will withstand a legal challenge after they meet with Arizona officials.

“It exactly mirrors the Arizona law,” Rhode Island state Rep. Peter Palumbo, a Democrat, told CNSNews.com. “We will tweak the bill.”

Palumbo will be going to Arizona with Rhode Island state Rep. Joseph Trillo, a Republican.

Their legislation would essentially codify an existing executive order signed in 2008 by Gov. Donald Carcieri, a Republican, mandating immigration checks on all new state workers and ordering state police to assist federal immigration officials.

This is Carcieri’s final year in office, so Palumbo said it is important to put the force of law behind what has already been Rhode Island policy. State troopers report illegal immigrants they encounter for speeding and other offenses to the U.S. Immigration & Customs Enforcement (ICE).

Because of the executive order, corruption was discovered in the Department of Motor Vehicles, with drivers licenses being sold to illegal aliens, Palumbo said.

In New Jersey, state Rep. Allison Little McHose, a Republican, introduced a series of proposals that focused primarily on requiring employers to verify the legality of workers, and preventing state benefits from going to illegal aliens.

“New Jersey continues to be a sanctuary state for illegals because they know they can come to the state and receive many free benefits, like medical care,” McHose said in a statement. “The benefits may be free for those receiving them, but not the rest of the public because these costs are borne by the taxpayers.”

Other states with proposals that mirror the Arizona law are Arkansas, Idaho, Indiana, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, Nevada, North Carolina, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas and Utah.

“We are very pleased to announce 22 states are now following Arizona’s lead to pass versions of a law that has the support of 60 percent to 81 percent of Americans according to polls,” said ALIPAC President William Gheen in a statement. “State and federal candidates are rushing to display their support for Arizona’s law and immigration enforcement. We will not stop until all American states are protected from this invasion as mandated by the Constitution of the United States.”

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you have questions about this posting or are interested in Divorce, Immigration, or Estate Law in RI or MA contact Massachusetts and Rhode Island Divorce Lawyer Rui P. Alves at 401-942-3100 or CONTACT him via email.

Thursday, August 19, 2010

RI Family Court Chief Judge Position Narrowed to 5 Finalists

RI Family Court Divorce Lawyer Rui P. Alves offers the following article concerning the appointment of the Chief Judge for the Rhode Island Family Court taken from the Providence Journal website and posted here in its entirety.


5 finalists selected for chief judge of R.I. Family Court

Wednesday, August 18, 2010

By Katie Mulvaney

Journal Staff Writer

PROVIDENCE — The Judicial Nominating Committee Tuesday night picked five Family Court judges as finalists to take the top seat at the court that handles divorce, child custody and some of the state’s most heart-rending cases.

The names the commission will send to Governor Carcieri as possible nominees to replace former Family Court Chief Judge Jeremiah S. Jeremiah Jr. include Judges Kathleen A. Voccola, Michael B. Forte, Laureen D’Ambra, Haiganush R. Bedrosian and Stephen J. Capineri. John E. McCann, who joined the bench in October, was the only contender not to make the list.

All eight commission members present voted in favor of naming Capineri and Forte as finalists. D’Ambra and Voccola each won seven votes. Commission member D. Faye Sanders opted not to support D’Ambra, while C. June Tow did not back Voccola.

Bedrosian, who has served as acting chief of the court since Jeremiah’s retirement June 30, won six votes. She failed to gain support from Sanders and fellow commissioner Norman L. Landroche Jr. Sanders cast the single vote for McCann.

Commissioners Mirlen A. Martinez Mal and Jeffrey M. Grybowski voted, although they did not attend the commission’s interviews of the candidates last week. Sanders also cast votes though she only briefly observed interviews.

There is no provision in the commission’s rules that prohibits a member from voting without participating in the interviews, Commission Chairman Dr. Herbert J. Brennan said. All the members had read each of the candidates’ applications, he said.

Before voting, the commission heard testimony from colleagues, friends and family of the six candidates as well as critics of the Family Court system.

Retired Family Court Judge Pamela M. Mactaz spoke on Bedrosian’s behalf as a friend and former colleague. Mactaz emphasized the importance of institutional knowledge to hoist the court out of its present “malaise” and lead it into the future. “The next chief justice of this court has to make some difficult choices,” Mactaz said, adding, “This is a woman who can say no.” Bedrosian, 67, of Warwick, joined the court in 1980, with prior private practice and prosecutorial experience.

Providence lawyer Patricia Rocha, daughter of the late Family Court Judge Gilbert T. Rocha, praised Capineri’s sharp mind, integrity and inclination to use education as a tool within the court. Capineri, 56, of East Providence, was named to the Family Court bench in 2001, after serving as a magistrate there for five years.

Voccola won accolades from Brother Brendan Gerrity, the executive director of Ocean Tides, the Narragansett-based school for troubled boys. Voccola, he said, affirms juveniles when juveniles need to be affirmed and treats kids with fair impartiality. With confidence and good humor, Voccola possesses the ability to make tough decisions, he said. Voccola was named to the bench in 1989 after serving as state liquor-control administrator.

Lia Stuhlsatz, a staff lawyer for Rhode Island Legal Services, told of Forte’s unsentimental fairness in applying the law. Forte, she said, gave a former client who had been in and out of jail a chance to prove she was a fit mother, despite her time in prison. His two decades on the bench had imbued him with the confidence and courage to send a child in state custody home, she said. Forte, 58, of Johnston, was appointed to the court in 1987. He served as a state senator in East Bay in the 1980s.

Victoria M. Almeida, president of the Rhode Island Bar Association, said D’Ambra had the experience and vision to bring the court into the modern day. She extolled D’Ambra’s collaborative approach and the administrative ability and strength of character she showed in challenging state practices as the former child advocate.

D’Ambra, 53, of Lincoln, joined the court in 2004, after acting as the child advocate for 15 years.

John E. McCann IV said his father could be stern when needed, but that he had a respectful manner and a voracious appetite for knowledge. “His only bias will be to do what is right,” the younger McCann said. McCann, 60, of Barrington, came to the court in October with 30 years of experience in private practice.

Under Rhode Island law, the governor is required to fill the vacancy within 21 days after the commission sends him the finalists. But his spokeswoman Amy Kempe said Carcieri views the 21-day time frame as merely advisory. The lifetime post carries a $154,707 base salary.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you have questions about this posting or are interested in Divorce, Immigration, or Estate Law in RI or MA contact Massachusetts and Rhode Island Divorce Lawyer Rui P. Alves at 401-942-3100 or CONTACT him via email.

Wednesday, August 18, 2010

Candidates for RI Family Court chief judge go before Commission

RI Family Court Divorce Lawyer Rui Alves found an article concerning the appointment of a new RI Family Court chief judge, and the views and opinions of six candidates, interesting. The full article is posted below.

6 candidates vetted in search for new R.I. Family Court chief judge

August 11, 2010

By Katie Mulvaney

Journal Staff Writer

PROVIDENCE –– Six Family Court judges Tuesday night shared their perceptions about strengths and weaknesses of the court that handles divorces, child custody disputes and other sensitive cases in hopes the Judicial Nominating Commission will pick them as a finalist to be the court’s next chief judge.

Over three hours, the commission interviewed Family Court judges Kathleen A. Voccola, Michael B. Forte, Laureen D’Ambra, Haiganush R. Bedrosian, Stephen J. Capineri and John E. McCann to replace Jeremiah S. Jeremiah Jr. The commission will forward three to five finalists’ names to Governor Carcieri for his consideration following a public hearing Aug. 17.

Forte, of Johnston, told the panel he became intrigued with law and its “power to lift people up or hold people down” in the 1970s. He did a stint student teaching at the Training School and later served as its athletic director, where he saw firsthand the importance of making good decisions and getting a solid education, he said.

At 34, after serving as a state legislator, he was named to the Family Court bench in 1987. He viewed its mission as healing broken families, he said, adding that his years as a former restaurant owner and legislator gave him business and management experience that made him the best candidate for chief judge. “This is a management position.”

Forte stressed that Family Court is “not a social service agency” and that it needed to get back to its core mission. As chief judge, he would do an exhaustive review of the court’s resources and reorganize the truancy program, he said. He would like to see increased use of technology to make the court more user friendly, particularly for people who do not speak English.

Bedrosian, the first woman appointed to the court in 1980, said she observed a growing need for family and domestic abuse counseling and substance abuse treatment and said the court must work with outside agencies to address such issues.

She praised mediation as an effective way to resolve divorce and custody cases, adding that as chief judge she would aim to change the court’s tenor to be less adversarial

Bedrosian, of Warwick, said she would like to see a panel set up to provide people who represent themselves in court with legal advice, particularly as the economy lags, forcing more people to do so. “I think that’s the way we have to go.” Bedrosian has served as acting Family Court chief judge since Jeremiah’s retirement June 30.

In response to a question by commission member Robert Silva about strong and weak points within Family Court, Voccola named the juvenile drug court, the family treatment drug court and other specialty courts as strengths. She listed the slow movement of divorce and custody cases as weaknesses.

Named to the bench in 1989, she described the court as both a court and a social services agency by necessity. “There are emotional issues and many people are damaged,” she said.

She said she would conduct an administrative audit and enhance the mediation program if she led the court. She emphasized that her supervisory and administrative background as the former state liquor control administrator as well as her diligence made her well equipped for the job.

“We often see good people on their worst days,” Capineri, of East Providence, observed to the commission. As chief judge, he said he would have the judges handling truancy cases tackle mediation every other day. He would also assign two judges to a dedicated trial calendar to move cases along, he said.

Appointed Family Court judge in 2001, Capineri said he would concentrate on staff training and establish an “arbitration week” each year to help resolve cases without a trial. Slow moving cases, he said, only serve to make people angry with the court, themselves, and drains their pocketbooks. He would endeavor, he said, to facilitate people sitting down to work out cases like “human beings,” in a less caustic manner.

McCann prided himself of making every sports game his children played throughout his career and his dedication to family. His three decades practicing family law imbued him with an understanding of what is working in Family Court and what is not.

Improvements needed are more mediators and more interpreters, said McCann, who Governor Carcieri appointed to the court last October. “The system does work it’s just a question of tweaking it here and there,” he said.

He ensures the safety of domestic violence victims and their children, he said, by strict enforcement of court orders. He added that his years as a corporate officer at a law firm and his ability to deal with and relate to people made him a good fit for the job.

D’Ambra said she was inspired to pursue the law and help children doing a thesis on teenage prostitutes in college in Boston. She realized then, she said, that the main things separating her from them was her economic background and education. Success in Family Court could keep a person out of adult court later in life, she said.

D’Ambra, of Lincoln, appointed judge in 2004, said her years as legal counsel for the state Department of Children, Youth and Families and as the state’s Child Advocate made her well-qualified to lead Family Court. She listed as an accomplishment recruiting Roger Williams University School of Law students to help mediate cases.

To protect children from abuse, she said she has night and weekend checks done to ensure that victims and the perpetrators are obeying protective orders. If they are not, she removes the children from the house, she said. Additionally, she has her clerk review each party’s criminal background to determine if any domestic violence issues are at play.


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you have questions about this posting or are interested in Divorce, Immigration, or Estate Law in RI or MA contact Massachusetts and Rhode Island Divorce Lawyer Rui P. Alves at 401-942-3100 or CONTACT him via email.

Tuesday, August 17, 2010

RI Domestic Violence Report from RI Department of Health

Alves Law RI domestic violence attorney Rui P. Alves found article regarding a study conducted by the RI Department of Health and involving race, income and incidence of domestic violence as being a noteworthy factor in Providence RI domestic violence situations.

The full posting follows below:

Study documents domestic violence by race, income
PROVIDENCE, R.I.

Black and Hispanic women, especially Black women in more affluent neighborhoods, are overrepresented in police-reported domestic violence information compiled by the Rhode Island Department of Health, according to a new analysis published in the journal Public Health Reports.

Four Brown University researchers found that although Black and Hispanic women comprised 6 percent of the state's 1990 population, they represented more than 17 percent of victims in police reports documenting domestic violence and sexual assault.

The study's authors say that Black and Hispanic women are not more prone to domestic violence in the state. Instead, the findings may reflect a point of entry difference among women. The federal government has funded a handful of states to establish domestic violence surveillance systems since the 1990s, but Rhode Island is the only state with a system largely centered on police reports. Other states rely on court reports or medical documents or a blend of both, says Dr. Wendy Verhoek-Oftedahl, study co-author and assistant professor of community health.

The Brown study looked at whether the risk of police-reported domestic violence varied in relation to a woman's race and neighborhood conditions. It found that White and Hispanic women were less likely to make a domestic violence report to police as neighborhoods became less impoverished and levels of poverty dropped. However, "Black women were as likely to contact police to report domestic violence in poor as in more-affluent neighborhoods," said lead author Dr. Deborah Pearlman, assistant professor of community health.

"We think that White and Hispanic women may take advantage of or have different options for domestic violence interventions," Pearlman says. "This may include contacting a private physician, having more direct access to a lawyer or the courts, or relying on social support from family and neighbors." But this study could not confirm that hypothesis, she says.

The findings of a higher number of Black women reporting to police builds on previous research that showed an increased likelihood that police will make an arrest if the victim and perpetrator are Black, note the authors, who acknowledge that the findings for Black women are complex.

"Race acts as a proxy for discrimination and for the restriction of resources," says Pearlman. "At every level of income, Blacks do not do as well as Whites and Hispanics. In the U.S. there is a skin color hierarchy that affects education, disposable income, wealth, assets, stability of employment, and health across the life course, even for Blacks living in neighborhoods with similar socioeconomic characteristics as Whites."

In terms of racial position in society, Black women are the least valued socially and economically, says Dr. Sally Zierler, co-author of the study and professor of community health. "Something about racial positioning also puts Black women at worse danger in their homes than White women. There is a loss of dignity for Black men as a result of racial discrimination. The more disintegrating one's own context, the fewer places there are to express anger."

The study's other author was doctoral graduate student Annie Gjelsvik. Grants from the National Institutes of Health and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention funded the research.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you have questions about this posting or are interested in Divorce, Immigration, or Estate Law in RI or MA contact Massachusetts and Rhode Island Divorce Lawyer Rui P. Alves at 401-942-3100 or CONTACT him via email.

Monday, July 26, 2010

Allstate Insurance Decisions Promote New Views on Tort Matters in Rhode Island

In the 2009 year, a prominent article in the legal community encompasses the growing gap between what insurance companies are offering for soft tissue injuries pre-trial, and what juries are awarding as verdicts. The trend has seen some tremendous injustices in this area rectified for the benefit of those injured, as well as the dogma that has followed and labeled these parties in the past minimized or eliminated.

RI Divorce and Personal Injury Lawyer Rui Alves, although not involved in any of these matters, feels as though the information is pertinent and timely, and offers a summary of the relevant facts and outcomes below.

In a recent 2009 decision, Attorney Mark Fay represented a party injured in a ‘low-impact collision.’ The extent of the Plaintiff’s injuries required medical treatments in excess of $5,000.00 and started immediately the day after the crash. Prior to the lawsuit, the Plaintiff was offered a modest $1,500.00 to settle the case out of court.

After trial, and the introduction of evidence that the injury aggravated a previous disc injury, together with Attorney Fay’s ability to negate the defense testimony of Dr. Morgan who stated that there was a “closed end period of partial disability” and that the Plaintiff’s injuries were “minor.”

The testimony of experts, as well as the discernment of the jury, brought the Plaintiff’s award to an astounding $96,272.35 including interest.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you have questions about this posting or are interested in Divorce, Immigration, or Estate Law in RI or MA contact Massachusetts and Rhode Island Divorce Lawyer Rui P. Alves at 401-942-3100 or CONTACT him via email.

RI Supports Insurance Reform Through Awards for Personal Injury Cases

2009 was an advantageous year for the soft-tissue injury personal injury client in Rhode Island. The decisions rendered by the State courts in trial matters, so vastly differed from the offers received by insurance companies across the board, that one could infer there is an upward trend in the way that juries are willing to decide insurance cases that leans heavily in favor, finally, of the victims.

Attorney Rui Alves, a Rhode Island and Massachusetts Family and Personal Injury Lawyer, had no involvement in any of these cases. His interest prompted him to offer them here in summarized format for information purposes only.


Pre-Trial Offer: $18,000.00

Arbitration Offer: non-binding, pre-trial arbitration offer of $43,000.00 including interest was denied by the carrier

Facts: 3 vehicle rear-end collision at a red light… Defendant slid into a truck on snowy/icy road conditions, pushing the truck into another vehicle driven by a 41 year old woman… the Defense for Liberty attempted to state that the truck was at fault for the Plaintiff’s injuries, not their insured

Injuries and Damages: 41 year old woman suffers chronic cervical injury, knee contusion and possible disc involvement… damages for medical expenses and work absence totaled $6,000.00

Verdict: Jury awards $135,000.00, the exact amount suggested by Plaintiff’s counsel, and in spite of voting for reform during voir dire questioning, and possible pre-existing condition by Plaintiff



Pre-Trial Offer: $5,000.00

Facts: Plaintiff files a claim for injuries sustained in a slip and fall on snow and ice covering a walkway… the property owner was found to be 75% responsible for failing to clear the walkway

Verdict: Plaintiff awarded $13,758.00 for injuries and damages against Allstate Insurance Company


Pre-Trial Offer: $21,000.00

Facts: Peter Iascone and Greg Sorbello represent a client against Allstate Insurance Company for injuries that effected ability to keep current employment status… Economist Dr. Feldman testified for the Plaintiff

Damages: Over $21,000.00 in medical bills from orthopedic surgeon and rehab employment specialist

Verdict: Newport County jury awards Plaintiff almost $90,000.00 including interest

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you have questions about this posting or are interested in Divorce, Immigration, or Estate Law in RI or MA contact Massachusetts and Rhode Island Divorce Lawyer Rui P. Alves at 401-942-3100 or CONTACT him via email.

Friday, July 23, 2010

RI Family Court Incarcerates Father for Failure to Pay RI Child Support

Alves Law Child Support Lawyer Rui Alves reports decision in father who failed to pay child support in RI Family Court.

Issue: RI Child Support

Details and Decision: Father was ordered to pay child support. Father failed to pay child support. After a hearing, father was incarcerated for failing to pay child support.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you have questions about this posting or are interested in Divorce, Immigration, or Estate Law in RI or MA contact Massachusetts and Rhode Island Divorce Lawyer Rui P. Alves at 401-942-3100 or CONTACT him via email.

Thursday, July 22, 2010

Mother Ordered to Pay Child Support in MA Probate and Family Court

Family Law Attorney Rui Alves of Alves Law announces the details of a recent case decision by the Massachusetts Probate and Family Court in awarding child support to a custodial parent.

Issue: MA Child Custody/Support

Details: Father wished to relocated his two minor children to Rhode Island. Mother had physical custody of the minor children in MA. After a trial, children were allowed to move to Rhode Island with father.

Decision: Mother was ordered to pay child support.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you have questions about this posting or are interested in Divorce, Immigration, or Estate Law in RI or MA contact Massachusetts and Rhode Island Divorce Lawyer Rui P. Alves at 401-942-3100 or CONTACT him via email.

Friday, July 16, 2010

Push to Ensure Injury Awards from Insurance Companies Starts in RI with Allstate Verdicts

There were substantial financial discrepancies in insurance company offers, and trial jury verdicts in 2009. The news is optimistic however, in terms of opening the door for personal injury victims to finally receive the amounts their cases are worth for damages, especially relating to soft-tissue injuries.

Although RI Family Law Attorney Rui Alves had no involvement in any of these cases, he feels that they have valuable information, and are important enough to report here. Some of the most notable examples from these cases are summarized below.

In 2009, a Massachusetts attorney represented a client who was injured in an accident. Allstate insurance company initially offered the client $10,000.00 to settle the matter before trial. The client incurred $2,700.00 in medical bills, and missed two days of work. The jury in this case awarded $97,000.00 to this client.

We may naturally ask, why such a large discrepancy between what the insurance company would offer pre-trial, and what the jury awarded. One could assume that if the insurance company knew that these cases would turn into such huge financial awards, perhaps they would offer more at the onset to eliminate both the time and money involved in pursuit of a trial.

In another instance, the Providence County Superior Court awarded a Providence auto body establishment, represented by a local attorney in a claim for property damage, a judgment against Allstate citing that the company must pay the Plaintiff the proper book value amount for the vehicle loss of $13,343.00, and not the original $3,700.00 initially offered.

In part, it is inferred, this disparity exists because the insurance company does not view 'soft tissue' injuries as particularly debilitating or lingering; a speculation that trial lawyers and champions of these injured parties are vehemently challenging on a national scope.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you have questions about this posting or are interested in Divorce, Immigration, or Estate Law in RI or MA contact Massachusetts and Rhode Island Divorce Lawyer Rui P. Alves at 401-942-3100 or CONTACT him via email.

Thursday, July 15, 2010

Mother Allowed to Relocate to RI With Child

Child Custody and Support Lawyer Rui Alves secures relocation allowance for mom with sole custody.

Issue: MA Child Custody/Support

Details: Mother wanted permission to relocate the child to Rhode Island. The parties had shared legal custody of the child. After successfully obtaining a guardian ad litem, mother was allowed to relocate to Rhode Island and awarded sole legal custody of the minor child.

Decision: Father was ordered to pay child support.


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you have questions about this posting or are interested in Divorce, Immigration, or Estate Law in RI or MA contact Massachusetts and Rhode Island Divorce Lawyer Rui P. Alves at 401-942-3100 or CONTACT him via email.

Monday, July 12, 2010

Personal Injury Cases were great examples of why Personal Injury Attorneys are so important in settlements

2009 represented a year that clearly showed how having proper representation by a Rhode Island Personal Injury Lawyer could mean the difference between settling for an unworthy amount and truly recouping for your losses. PI Attorney Rui Alves found this case below representative of the types of cases where someone wrongfully injured is entitled to deserved compensation.

Case in 2009:

A patron is beaten by bouncers outside of the Foxy Lady Nightclub sustaining severe injuries requiring hospitalization, extensive therapy and leaving lingering pain and disability.

The insurance company for the club practiced flat out denial that the incident even happened. While the Plaintiff saw damages in excess of $24,000.00 for injuries ranging from subdural hemorrhage, and sustained headaches and blurry vision thereafter.

The jury in the presiding Justice's court came back with a verdict awarding the Plaintiff $300,000.00 plus interest of 108%, for a total of $624,000.00. This sends a clear and compelling message that it will no longer be ‘business as usual’ for insurance companies when there are injured human beings involved.


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you have questions about this posting or are interested in Divorce, Immigration, or Estate Law in RI or MA contact Massachusetts and Rhode Island Divorce Lawyer Rui P. Alves at 401-942-3100 or CONTACT him via email.

Divorce Attorney Rui Alves has MA Family Court Order Father to Pay Support

Family Law Attorney Rui P. Alves secured the following decision for a client in Massachusetts Probate and Family Court.


Issue: MA Child Custody/Support

Details: Mother allowed to move to Massachusetts from Rhode Island with her newborn child. Father contested that Rhode Island was the correct court. After going to MA Court, MA was established as the proper court.

Decision: Father was ordered to pay child support.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you have questions about this posting or are interested in Divorce, Immigration, or Estate Law in RI or MA contact Massachusetts and Rhode Island Divorce Lawyer Rui P. Alves at 401-942-3100 or CONTACT him via email.

Wednesday, July 7, 2010

New Rhode Island Family Court Judge Sworn In

Family law Attorney Rui P. Alves of Alves Law found this article, from the Providence Journal website, about the recent swearing in of new Family Court Judge Karen Lynch Bernard to be very informative.

The full article follows below.


Karen Lynch Bernard sworn in as R.I. Family Court judge
June 25, 2010
By W. Zachary Malinowski
Journal Staff Writer

PROVIDENCE — An outpouring of family, friends and state dignitaries crowded into the steamy State House rotunda Thursday to witness the swearing-in of Karen Lynch Bernard as an associate justice of the state Family Court.

The ceremony, often interrupted with moments of levity, was a tribute to Lynch and her large extended family that has been a fixture in Warwick and in courtrooms across the state for decades. After Governor Carcieri introduced her as the newest state judge, Lynch kissed her husband, Bob Bernard, and hugged her three children.

She inched her way to the lectern and immediately paid homage to her parents, John D. Lynch, a prominent divorce and defense lawyer, and her mother, Pat.

Lynch is one of the couple’s 10 children.

“I could never thank you enough for the help and guidance you have given me over the years,” she said.

Lynch, has practiced family and juvenile law as a partner with her family’s firm, Lynch Bernard and Lynch, in Warwick. She is the newest Family Court judge and she replaces retired Judge Howard I. Lipsey.

Her first assignment will be in Family Court in Newport.

The swearing-in was a celebration of a local woman with strong Warwick ties who had made it to the top of the legal profession.

Francis X. Flaherty, an associate state Supreme Court justice from Warwick, served as the master of ceremonies and he reminisced about his days as Warwick mayor when Lynch served as the first woman in the city solicitor’s office.

“Karen, by virtue of your hard work, integrity and intelligence,” you have earned the right to serve on the Family Court bench, Flaherty said.

Also on hand for the invocation was the Rev. Brian J. Shanley, president of Providence College where, in 1985, Lynch earned her bachelor’s degree. “We are very proud of Karen, and I’m honored to be here today,” he said.

Others among the more than 200 in attendance were retiring Chief Family Court Judge Jeremiah S. Jeremiah Jr., Supreme Court Chief Justice Paul A. Suttell and dozens of other judges and elected officials.




----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you have questions about this posting or are interested in Divorce, Immigration, or Estate Law in RI or MA contact Massachusetts and Rhode Island Divorce Lawyer Rui P. Alves at 401-942-3100 or CONTACT him via email.

Friday, June 25, 2010

Independent Investigation Units in Family Court

Why We Need Independent Investigation Units for Child Custody Matters in Family Court

It is no secret that a great deal of corruption and bad judgment exists within the structure of the Family Court Judicial system, not just here in Rhode Island, but all over the country. With social service department employees being severely overworked, all but the most outstanding and glaring cases of abuse, neglect and violence fall between the cracks, often to the fatal detriment of the minor children involved.

Whether caused by poor judgment, lack of understanding, or in some cases, blatant disregard and willful obstruction of the facts surrounding many domestic and custody matters, more and more children are dying at the hands of parents who have no business with custody in the first place.

The call for independent investigation units for the Family Court systems in this country is nothing new, but perhaps with enough information about what happens when those overworked employees let someone slide through, or corrupt judges rule in favor of the wrong parent, something will finally be undertaken to protect these children from becoming more victims.

A pertinent story, taken from The Custody Scam blog, cited many instances where this has occurred. One such story, involving a Rhode Island child, is summarized below.



On February 21, 1992, Rhode Island Family Court's Chief Judge Jeremiah Jeremiah gave this two-year-old to the sole custody and possession of her father despite his history of domestic violence and failure to pay child support. The father, a police officer, brought false charges against his ex-wife, first saying she was a drug addict. (Twenty-two random tests proved she was not.) Then he had her arrested for bank fraud, then for filing a false report, then for sexual abuse, then for kidnapping. None of his charges stuck.

The child remained with her father and stepmother until 2003, when she was 14 years old. Having realized during a visit that her mother was not a drug addict, the teenager persuaded another judge to let her return to her mother. There she began working on the painful issues of lifelong coercion and deception. Most painful has been her father’s continuing refusal to let her visit two dearly loved half-sisters, whom she has not seen since 2003.

She is one of countless children in Rhode Island subjected to severe emotional and physical trauma by Family Court. After she turned 18 in 2007, she gave the Parenting Project permission to publish her picture on behalf of all children who have been held hostage by Rhode Island custody scams.

We are using this blog to provide links to stories about custody cases around the world as people become aware of this spreading form of child abuse and legal abuse. People often turn away from these horrifying cases. But we need to face them and work together to force courts to improve their response and protect children.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you have questions about this posting or are interested in Divorce, Immigration, or Estate Law in RI or MA contact Massachusetts and Rhode Island Divorce Lawyer Rui P. Alves at 401-942-3100 or CONTACT him via email.

Tuesday, June 22, 2010

Rhode Island Family Court Guardian Ad Litem

Role and Responsibilities

A guardian ad litem is a person, typically an attorney and usually appointed by the court, who looks out for the best interest of a minor child who is somehow involved in legal proceedings. The guardian ad litem must have proper credentials, and is generally appointed in situations where there is the presence of abuse, neglect, or conflicts between parents and siblings, but can also be appointed to ensure that the financial interests of the child are observed.

Initially, the guardian ad litem in Rhode Island will meet with the child and perform an investigatory interview. They will then prepare a report for the court detailing the background of the case, an identification of any and all persons interviewed, a statement by the child encompassing their emotional, medical and service needs, as well as their own wishes with regard to the outcome of the case.

Communications between the child and guardian ad litem are not privileged, which means that they can be shared with other parties and attorneys in the matter, as well as submitted to court proceedings.

The guardian ad litem has broad and far reaching powers concerning the children they represent. Medical and school records are available to them upon request, they are to appear at all court proceedings that affect the interests of the child, and they act as an officer of the court with quasi-judicial immunity for any action they must take regarding the well-being of the children they represent.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you have questions about this posting or are interested in Divorce, Immigration, or Estate Law in RI or MA contact Massachusetts and Rhode Island Divorce Lawyer Rui P. Alves at 401-942-3100 or CONTACT him via email.