It's in the hands of judge but need advice ASAP

[stuckinbetween]

All our final arguments,closing statements, etc. were turned into court yesterday, the deadline.  Opposing counsel has not yet turned her's in.  During his testimony, stbxNPDh began to suggest how certain things should be decided.  The judge said, "You had a chance to decide in mediation.  Now I decide."  But last night, stbx sent me a long email telling me what expenses I'll need to be responsible for starting now.  He's giving orders before the judge has.  I sent the email to my L. who forwarded it to the court.

My L. may have to file an emergency motion because h refuses to pay back the life insurance loan he took out to pay for expenses (not mine).  Ins. co. is about to cancel the policy I've been paying premiums on for 30 yrs.  I see it as alimony insurance now.

Question;  if there is an emergency hearing and stbx is there, should my L. now try to expose his NPD by provoking him so the court can see?  As I told you previously, she very effectively used narc supply to get him to answer all the questions she needed, however NPDh was lulled and complacent, not showing his true colors.  LnL's court experience got me thinking.

Seeking all points of view.  Thanks!

Stuckinbetween

[ForeverDad]

Yes, lawyer should get the insurance matter before the judge.

I'd let your lawyer off her leash.  She knows how to do her work, she probably knows what to do to get the best results.

[livednlearned]

All our final arguments,closing statements, etc. were turned into court yesterday, the deadline.  Opposing counsel has not yet turned her's in.  :)uring his testimony, stbxNPDh began to suggest how certain things should be decided.  The judge said, "You had a chance to decide in mediation.  Now I decide."  But last night, stbx sent me a long email telling me what expenses I'll need to be responsible for starting now.  He's giving orders before the judge has.  I sent the email to my L. who forwarded it to the court.

My L. may have to file an emergency motion because h refuses to pay back the life insurance loan he took out to pay for expenses (not mine).  Ins. co. is about to cancel the policy I've been paying premiums on for 30 yrs.  I see it as alimony insurance now.

Question;  if there is an emergency hearing and stbx is there, should my L. now try to expose his NPD by provoking him so the court can see?  As I told you previously, she very effectively used narc supply to get him to answer all the questions she needed, however NPDh was lulled and complacent, not showing his true colors.  LnL's court experience got me thinking.

Seeking all points of view.  Thanks!

Stuckinbetween

Yes! Trying to second-guess your stbx here... .  what reason is there to do anything about the loan? He is dictating to the judge what you should do, even after the judge told him it was his turn to decide. Put the matter before the court hard, especially since your judge seems equally short of temper about your stbx's case as my judge was toward my ex.

My L did not ask N/BPDx any questions directly, but our Ls have a relatively easy job if they know what's going on. All they have to do is talk up the truth. My L placated and lured N/BPDx out during our deposition, praising him, getting him to answer questions about all his expertise as a trial attorney, how many times he had done depositions in the past, how experienced he was. He was practically purring. Then she promptly led him into a trap he just finished building. His whole demeanor changed, his body language changed, his mouth got dry. And she did it by challenging him, totally different tenor than how she started. She dropped the praise entirely, and he wasn't ready for that. Got him stinking mad, and he got flustered, and said things that contradicted what he had just said.

Emotional reasoning -- that's what he is doing. Your L sounds like she knows enough about what's going on that she should focus on drawing out his angry side.

[stuckinbetween]

Our NPDs must be twins, LnL.  Today I received an overnight mailing from him containing all the insurance policies (my health ins., the universal life policy--installment payment on that loan is over $1500, and he knows I get along on only $721 a month!) expecting me to pay on them.  If we don't hear from his L. there will be an emergency hearing to keep the policies open.  Usually only the Ls are allowed to speak, though he will be there.  How do you draw out the beast in him, when he can't speak?

Seething and Pacing,

Stuckinbetween

[livednlearned]

Our NPDs must be twins, LnL.  Today I received an overnight mailing from him containing all the insurance policies (my health ins., the universal life policy--installment payment on that loan is over $1500, and he knows I get along on only $721 a month!) expecting me to pay on them.  If we don't hear from his L. there will be an emergency hearing to keep the policies open.  Usually only the Ls are allowed to speak, though he will be there.  How do you draw out the beast in him, when he can't speak?

Seething and Pacing,

Stuckinbetween

Is his L the same one that represented him recently?

[stuckinbetween]

Yes, it's the same L.  She still hasn't turned in her Proposed Final Judgement even though she pressed the court for an earlier deadline than the 19th.  Something really doesn't add up.  My L. had over 8000 pages for this case and turned over over 80 pages of evidence.  His L. turned in only h's tax return and a page of evidence given to her by my L.  H overnighted me a packet full of bills he expects me to pay.  The whole thing is disquieting.

His L. states this case was overlitigated and wants Rosen fees, whatever they are!

[ForeverDad]

Rosen fees: The Florida Supreme Court in Rosen... .  held that a trial court can use a "results obtained" or "prevailing party" standard in awarding attorneys' fees and costs. The Rosen court ruled that need and ability to pay still are the primary elements in determining entitlement to, and the amount of, any attorneys’ fees and costs award in Florida. Having said that, however, the Florida court ruled that all relevant circumstances are to be considered by the trial court in awarding fees and costs... .  inclusive of: the scope and history of the litigation; the duration of the litigation; the merits of the respective positions; whether the litigation is brought or maintained primarily to harass (or whether a defense is raised mainly to frustrate or stall); and the existence and course of prior or pending litigation.

Obviously, Rosen is of immense import. The family law practitioner who best serves his or her client will be even more mindful of the trial judge’s ability to assess the overall reasonableness of the fee request at the conclusion of the case. The case, therefore, should be quickly assessed, settlement offers should be made quickly, and the efficacy of discovery should be considered at the onset, all with this standard in mind. The party with the greater financial resources should be even more mindful of this standard, and seek to minimize the client’s exposure to fees by streamlining the litigation, and searching for methods to resolve the case without undue expense.

The Florida Bar Journal - April 1999

www.floridabar.org/divcom/jn/jnjournal01.nsf/Author/199D4A9B8DC5229385256ADB005D625C

Briefly they're trying to claim you caused the excessive litigation.  It's what we call projection or transference of their culpability onto you.  Of course, not fair and not right.  Not surprising, a lawyer's duty is not fairness or rightness, it's to help the client lose the least and gain the most.  So just because his lawyer filed it doesn't mean it will convince the court in his favor.  Don't let it scare you, your lawyer will handle it.

It's amazing the nonsense that can be claimed in family court.  I recall one acquaintance years ago, mother of a then young girl, an adult by now, whose ex had filed in court to have his child support recalculated to zero.  Why?  Because on his federal tax forms he had enough deductions (mileage deductions from delivering delayed airline luggage) to offset his tax on reported earnings.  Yeah, he still made money, but he felt that if he didn't have to pay federal taxes then he shouldn't have to pay child support either.   I told the mother not to worry, there wasn't any basis for his claim to get anywhere in court.

[stuckinbetween]

FD, thank you so much.  You are a gem of a resource for this board.  this case has been very expensive, but we've had to defend against repeated sanctions (all denied) and had to file numerous 'motions to compel' h to turn over documents, and he still has not turned over all missing accounts.

Opposing counsel submitted her Proposed Final Judgement, 3 days late.  My L. had to file a Motion for Contempt to force her.  I feel OC put us at a disadvantage because she took 3 days beyond the deadline to study our closing argument and Proposed Final Judgement.  You are so right, FD, about dirty tactics!

I have another question:

What are "competing orders?"  My L. says these are rare and she's only had to use them twice in her 6 yr. legal career.  Has anyone had these in their divorce cases?  Any definitions or experience on competing orders will be appreciated.  I'm in the dark here.

Thanks,

Stuckinbetween

[ForeverDad]

I believe these are things your lawyer ought to explain?  I did an internet search and it seems "competing orders" refers two separate orders that conflict with each other.  Are there different orders that require one or the other of you to do (or not do) something in one that is prohibited (or required) in the other?

For example, this is an example my lawyer described.  In one settlement order an ex was required to deliver firewood to his ex.  However, he also had to observe a stay-away order the ex had.  Yes, you can guess, he complied with the first, delivered the firewood and of course was arrested and jailed because in complying with one order he violated the other.  If he had pondered his options he would have had some one else deliver the wood or tried to get one or the other order changed.

[stuckinbetween]

Thanks FD.  When I find out what 'competing orders' are, I'll let everyone know.