Jump to Navigation

Marietta Family Law Blog

Pandora's Box, the contempt that keeps on giving.

"Be careful what you ask for," could well be another title for tonight's installment. Every so often we are hired to defend a contempt case.  As we review the other side's contentions, we assess the Order or Agreement from which our client's duty arose and in it we often find a treasure trove of abuses wrought by the other party.  This is the classic situation of complaining of a mote in your ex's eye whilst ignoring the beam in your own.

We were recently retained by someone sued for contempt for $10,000 which was still owed to the other party.  As we dove deeper into the case, we discovered that our client was owed $35,000 from the other party.  As that case developed, don't you know that the opposing counsel received quite a call from his client. Don't you know that the opposing party learned and learned and learned times 25,000, just how stupid a mistake he had made to ever raise the issue in the first place.

Not too long ago, we were retained when a fellow filed a modification action, as he later told the judge, just to prove a point.  Unfortunately for him, we found evidence of his contempt stemming from the Final Judgment and Decree which totalled well over $250,000.  That is a gift that keeps on giving.

Many biblical references come to mind.  I've cited one above.  Another one is, "let he who is without sin cast the first stone."  A non biblical reference is, "people in glass houses should not throw stones."  One never cited, because I just made it up, is: "Tread softly on your neighbor's grass when it is well fertilized by your own dog."  Okay, I realize why that one is never cited. It's fairly lame.

The moral to the story, though, is just because you go looking for a fight, that doesn't mean you're going to win it.  Before you pick a fight, get a real good assessment of what your likelyhood of winning is.  And if you are having to defend a fight you didn't bring, get a really good, outside the box assessment of all of your options.  More often than not, we have found the hidden gem that makes your ex rue the day they ever stooped so low as to go back into court with you.

Michael Manely

The Cayman Courts

Today was Judiciary day.  Shelia and I left our seminar and visited the Cayman Courts. It was time to leave the safe confines of the legal education we were receiving in the seminar room and get to the heart of the matter working in International Family Law.

One of the critical efforts we make is to develop personal relationships with the people in the countries in which we remotely and/or directly practice law.  Today we met with the Clerk of Civil Courts to have a long and fruitful discussion about the Hague Convention and service of process under the Hague, which is handled exclusively through his office.  We had a wide ranging discussion about Cayman's judiciary, their practice and how a Cayman Island final appeal is still handled before the Privy Council in London.  We toured the Courthouse, viewed the Courtrooms, evaluating their technological savvy (yes, they can handle video conferencing),  and assessed different agencies that review and report on courthouse action, always essential when you need day by day intelligence during the pendency of a case. 

After our appointments at court, we sat with natives of the Island, some of them decendants of Cayman Islanders from centuries ago.  We spent a long time enjoying the hospitalities of Pedro St. James and a decendant of the man who built the great house back in the 1700's. We learned about life on the island, not only its extensive, rich history, but its present pace. What it means to live in Grand Cayman now.

We moved from there to Bodden town where we sampled local wares. They made me the freshest most sumptuous fruit smoothy I have ever had!  We enjoyed our conversation as the local band was warming up for the Friday night festivities.  

Next we drove up the center of the island, past the Botanical Gardens, at which we had spent considerable time in some days ago, then driving along the north shore, heading west on out to Rum Point.  While Rum Point is particularly pretty, the picturesque small inlets of beach and sun setting brilliantly over the water, the entire north shore looks lost, derelict. There are certainly examples of significant wealth hanging on, but so many places were abandoned or for sale that, rather than seem well out into the hinterlands of Grand Cayman, the place seemed more abandoned, lonely.  Even out here, you can see the effects of the world wide recession.

Soon enough we headed back through the island and into Georgetown to enjoy dinner out on the water.  We didn't keep late hours there for we wanted to get back to the hotel to take our first walk on the beach.  We were successful! Hence, I am blogging again at this obscene hour, but thankfully from my hotel room.

International family law has many perks.  One of the best is meeting the judges and clerks of the far away courts in which we work.  Another is spending time with and getting to know the people who live there, in that wonderful far away place.  Not only do Shelia and I dearly enjoy getting to know such fantastic people in all corners of the globe, and not only do we know the value of having such one on one connections which only strengthen through the years, but the on the ground learning we gain from being there, touching the Earth from whence a case arises, gives us immeasurable understanding.

Our trip is drawing closer to its close.  Our seminar wraps up tomorrow and we fly home on Sunday.  We are looking forward to being home after being gone from our boys this long week, but the education, the experience we have derived from here, is invaluable.

Michael Manely

Law Internationally: From the Front Lines of Grand Cayman

Okay, I'll admit it.  I'm having a really good time.  I'm blogging tonight, not at an unusual time for me, but from an unusual place.  I'm sitting on a beach in the Carribean on Grand Cayman's Seven Mile Beach, listening to waves roll in as dependable and as regular as a steady, strong heart beat. 

I'm in Grand Cayman this week for a conference. It is the 23rd Annual Tropical Seminar of the State Bar of Georgia.  A group of attorneys gather every year at this same time but on a different Carribean island to teach and to learn some rather high end subjects.  This year was the first year that this seminar grabbed my attention, in part because we've been doing so much work in the Carribean and also because the topics were so timely and pertinent to the work that we do.

Today's sessions, for example, covered issues such as the use of public relations in litigation; specific acting techniques for the courtroom; the intricacies, complexities and nuances of appellate litigation; a very high tech immersion into the discovery of electronically stored information; and the most detailed and up to date information about the litigation over the Federal Health Care legislation, taught by one of the authors of a Supreme Court brief on the subject.

Today was fairly intense.

But soon the last hour drew nigh and we were dismissed for the day, to reconvene tomorrow morning to tackle more complex issues, and turned loose on the island of Grand Cayman.

One could well ask, "Why do you do such things as attend intense, high end seminars?"  Of course, I could well answer, "Because they are held in the Carribean." But that would not be the entire story.  I do such things because I know of no business, except professional sports, where someone is payed extremely well to make sure that you lose. Every day, every case presents new challenges, new threats to our clients from new tactics employed by creative, intelligent, well funded opposing counsels.  We owe it to our clients to stay well ahead of that curve, to have already thought and worked through those cutting edge issues and opportunities before the opposition ever had an incling that they exist.  We outwit, outfox and outthink the opposition because we care enough to.

So, I'm stuck in Grand Cayman for the rest of the week.  But don't cry for me. It's a dirty job.  But frankly, somebody's got to do it.

Michael Manely

The Cutting Edge of Family Law

We handle many family law cases each month.  We are fortunate to have hundreds of families entrust their family law issues to us every year.  Most of our cases are rather straightforward (from the global perspective of the standardization implicitly imposed by the judiciary because of the thousands of cases heard by Superior Court judges each year).  This makes The Firm's efforts extremely effective and relatively affordable.

However, in the high volume of work that we manage, we have a significant assortment of unusual, cutting edge issues that keep us at the fore of family law. For example: the keen distinction between the tactical advantages of differing judicial forums; the in the trenches immediacy with a family literally in the throes of a life and death crisis; the strategic decision of venue choice, should the defendant be fool enough to "keeping his options open;"; the Alice in Wonderland situation of asserting when an Order is no longer an Order because, like the Cheshire Cat, it has vanished into thin air; and, the ever shifting paradigms, standards and processes of differing international courts and customs.  And that's just in this past month!

If this stuff sounds kind of out there, it is.  It requires us to stay on our toes. We, the attorneys of the firm, are called to it.  Whenever unusual issues arise we have a lively and enlivening round table, bouncing around options, dashing off research, positing competing strategies, and always arguing the devil's advocate's position.  

These are ennobling afternoons, spread out across the miles between our several offices.  John will fire off a salvo from Lawrenceville.  Nicole will shoot back from Atlanta.  Jeremy will bring it all home from Marietta or Canton.  And I'll argue to the contrary from wherever I'm practicing that day.

I feel for our opposing counsel who are quite often on their own, trying to manage the demand for their time against the demand for their revenues with resources that only a solo practitioner can generate.  And they have to face us. The Manely Firm has such an advantage with the exceptional talent and high energy of our attorneys, with our dizzying array of bright and devoted paralegals, and with the breadth and depth of our administrative team who manage us all so well.

We are priviledged to help many, many people, thoroughly and effectively and we are blessed with the ability to treat the most cutting edge of family law issues with a finesse which is both unrivaled and incomparable.

We handle it all, from the Alpha to the Omega, from the issue less to the issue laden.  And it's all family law. 

Can you tell that I like working here?

Michael Manely

Pointless

During an initial consultation, I'm often asked when does one know when it is time to finally file for a divorce, when the relationship is over.  "When a conversation is pointless,"  I often answer.

Communication is a great marker to determine whether there is any reason to carry on.  If you can communicate, actually talk to the other person so that you are heard and you hear them, then, so long as both of you want to, there is a reason to keep trying.  Of course, if you don't want to, then you've already answered your question. 

But if you can't communicate, if he doesn't listen, if she already has her pat and pithy response before your sentence has been concluded with it's period, then further efforts are quite possibly pointless.  Of course, if, in the midst of the hopelessness you both express that this is not how you mean to act toward each other and would like to seek a counselor's help to learn the tools of effective communication, then all is not lost; there is hope; the relationship is not pointless.

If communication has become pointless, try to resist the urge to respond with anything less than your better angels.  Once upon a time you cared.  Once upon a time, so did he.  It's just time to exit as gracefully as possible for this, too, shall pass.  

If you can identify the finality of your relationship, you can be in charge of your method of moving on.  It is the uncertainty that causes the turbulence, I believe. It is the turbulence that causes the anger.  

Divorces that are not motiviated by anger, that are past that stage, are much easier on the client.  Resolve is a wonderful thing.  These divorces cost less and take less time, generally, because of the client's steady resolve.

So, is your communication with your spouse pointless?  Do you define your relationship in mostly negative terms?  The sun will rise again tomorrow.  How many more days are you willing to live your life pointless?

Michael Manely

Open Marriage

With all the talk about Newt's idea of a healthy marriage, I thought I'd weigh in. Unfortunately for the purient at heart, what I mean by open marriage is an entirely different thing.

I've been having a great debate with another attorney at The Manely Firm, Nicole Elder.  This is one of the great benefits of having excellent, bright attorneys at The Firm. Nicole is quite the Constitutional privacy rights advocate. In my argument, I assert the Constitution as well, though from a wholly different perspective.  

Before I wax too esoteric, let me cut to the chase.  Congress and the General Assembly, with assent from the respective Executive Branches, have determined that it is illegal to spy on your spouse.  You can't hack into their computer to find the dirt on their doings.  You can't put a GPS in their car to find out whether they are stopping off to pick up some milk or really stopping off to pick up something else.  I call this law the "Legislator's Protection Act."

With narrow exception, tracking your spouse has become a no-no, when, until recently, it was fair game, even anticipated, understood and well accepted should the need or suspicion arise.

This is the essence of the privacy argument that Nicole makes: you have a right to privacy in your person and in your affairs, even from your spouse.  I disagree.  I think, once married, everything is on the table, even that which is under the table, hence the often expressed sentiment, "if you aren't doing anything wrong, you shouldn't object to a little search now and then."  If the search is conducted by the police without a warrant, I, too would have my hackles up.   But we aren't talking about Big Brother, we're talking about your spouse.

I argue that your spouse should be able to track you and hack your computer. I'm aware that this activity could be the delight of a sinister stalker, but if that is the scenario, divorce him, don't stay married and insist on your right to hide the ball.

Hiding something creates worry.  Worry cannot lead to a healthy marriage.  There should be nothing to hide.  There should be nothing you want to hide.  This is one of the tests of how you are really doing in your marriage.  If you have something you don't want your spouse to see (besides her birthday present), then you have a problem in your marriage.

I've been working through this issue for some time and I've found a solution.  We use pre-nuptial and post-nuptial agreements for other situations, why not this one?  The future or existing spouses could agree to the ground rules.  Can they have open access to everything?  Can they use a GPS?  Can they hack into each other's computer? Better still, shall they agree to have no passwords kept from each other? Will they grant full access to each other's cell phone and each app attached thereto? Can they agree to grant each other the right to know each other's whereabouts at all times and each person with whom they are affiliating? 

Write it out. Get it signed.  Get it on the table so neither of you have to worry about what is going on under the table.  Have a trully open marriage.

So there, Nicole.  Your turn.

Michael Manely

Dr. King

There was quite a party on the Marietta Square today. Martin Luther King, Jr. Day is big in Marietta! Party songs were pumped from the stage early in the morning, soon to be followed by many bands and many more speeches, banners and signs.

As the parade reached its destination, the Square was decked out in its finest with several thousand celebrating people, celebrating the life, message and will power of the most powerful man the world knew in the second half of the 20th Century. (I'd give the 1st half to Ghandi, something I'm sure Dr. King would support given how much he admired and cited Ghandi's work.) Steadfast, non-violent, irrefutable resolve for the good of human kind. Dr. King's message lives on.

I had the wonderful experience of being in Dr. King's presence on a few occasions.  His children, Dexter and Bunny (Bernice) and I studied and played together from time to time.  Dr. King's presence was powerful and warming.  As great as his presence was his message, his call to hope, his call to action.

It is quite intentional that our firm carries on that work through our philosophy, through the way we treat everyone with dignity and respect, through the way that we steadfastly, resolutely work toward positive change in the family's dynamics, whether or not the judge or the opposing side ever sees it or understands it.

In his speech delivered April 4, 1967 at the Riverside Church in New York City, Dr. King said, in part, "...we must rapidly begin the shift from a thing-oriented society to a person-oriented society. When machines and computers, profit motives and property rights, are considered more important than people, the giant triplets of racism, extreme materialism, and militarism are incapable of being conquered... A true revolution of values will lay hand on the world order and say of war, 'This way of settling differences is not just.'... A nation that continues year after year to spend more money on military defense than on programs of social uplift is approaching spiritual death... America, the richest and most powerful nation in the world, can well lead the way in this revolution of values. There is nothing except a tragic death wish to prevent us from reordering our priorities so that the pursuit of peace will take precedence over the pursuit of war. There is nothing to keep us from molding a recalcitrant status quo with bruised hands until we have fashioned it into a brotherhood."

I know I run the risk of appearing to use Dr. King to further the firm's interests, but that is not my intent.  My intent it to honor the great man and to show you the source and depth of our values.  I know that a family that spends its energy, efforts and resources on war and conflict within that family cannot and will not survive.  I know that there is nothing except a tragic death wish that prevents a person from reordering their priorities "so that the pursuit of peace will take precedence over the pursuit of war."  As it is true for our nation, so it is true for ourselves. 

I consciously miss Dr. King, probably on a weekly basis, but I hold very dear the uplifting vision he gave us all.  I want our firm to live up to his expectations.  I want to, too.

Michael Manely

High Praise

We are conducting our year end analysis of all things that can be analyzed. It is how we constantly improve our efficient delivery of affordable legal services, at least as much as one can when, on occassion, a well paid adversary is using his best efforts to muck up your efficiency and thwart your affordability.

One of our year end studies involves an assessment of our sources of business, determining where our clients come from.  I'm pleased to report that we had 133 word of mouth referrals last year.  Of course, most of those come from brothers and sisters in the Bar who admire the work we do and from former clients who greatly appreciate our efforts and are still enjoying our successes on their behalf, but an oft repeated source of referrals come from an unlikely source: former opposing parties.  I consider a referral from a former opposing party high praise indeed.

Frequent readers of this blog well know our firm's over-arching philosophy of preserving families.  Divorce, contempt and modification are short term passages. They have a relatively quick end. Familes carry on long after the litigation is over. A quality family law firm, our family law firm, remains ever aware of this truth and seeks resolution of the issues as expeditiously, efficiently, economically and as peacefully as possible.  

Of course there are situations in which the other side won't listen to reason and needs to be dealt with more firmly than would be optimum, and there are situations in which unscrupulous opposing counsels don't see family law as an calling to do good for families but as an opportunity to gin up a big fee, but most cases, most situations, respond well to family centered solutions that preserve the family's assets for what matters most, the family.

I had one such referral today.  I thought about this family just yesterday, maybe something was in the air, and I wondered how they were doing.  My client and the opposing party were good people who were just going through a tough time. It warmed my heart to learn that the opposing party thought a lot of our work, enough to refer her friend.  She knows that we will take good care of him to see that he gets the right result without the armageddon that can come with a family law suit.

I love the work that we do.  And while I don't plan to leave the practice any time soon, I want to leave our holistic approach to family law as our lasting legacy. I would like to see the affordable, family centered approach become the overwhelming norm in family law.

And I would like to thank the kind hearted lady who suggested that her friend give us a call.

Michael Manely

The Manely Firm, P.C.

It's what's inside that counts.

We all operate from an internal script, largely written by our experiences from early on.  Unless we are extremely adept at paying attention to the slightest hint of subconcious motivation, we are directed, even dominated by this script, without much of a chance to operate authentically, genuinely in our lives.

This script often wreaks havoc in marriage.  Life is swell, everything is rosy. A couple meet, get to know one another, fall in love, enjoy hour upon hour of bliss, entranced by the wonderfulness of the other.  Then, as logic would suggest, they get married.  Upon the minister announcing the pair now "husband and wife," a switch is flipped in each and the internal tapes begins to roll.

Both husband and wife now play the husband tapes and wife tapes they've separately formulated over the years by all of the husband/wife messages fed to them.  The internal drive tapes have very little bearing on the actual relationship built by the lovers who just got married and far more to do with the marital and post marital relationships they observed growing up.

And so the phrase arises, "you're not the person I married."  "No," if he could speak the truth, "I am an amalgam of my father and of my mother's relationship to my father and many, many other experiences buried so deep I may never know they are there.  And by the way, why aren't you acting like my mother?"

So it is that we are severely burdened by those messages burned into our brains when we had little power to evaluate them.  So it is we find it difficult to behave authentically in our marriage.

While the scripts husbands and wives play out has a dominant role in my practice, the internal, un-audited scripts play out in every facet of our lives. And it is from that awareness that I assess the bizzare story from Gwinnett County about an elementary school third grade math sheet that posed several extremely peculiar word problems.

Among the word problems posed to the third graders were these three:

- Each tree had 56 oranges.  If 8 slaves pick them equally, then how much would each slave pick?

- Frederick had 6 baskets filled with cotton. If each basket held 5 pounds, how many pounds did he have all together? 

- If Frederick got two beatings a day, how many beatings did he get in one week? 2 weeks?

The school contends the questions were interdisciplinary.  They were blending math with social studies.  The children had been learning about Frederick Douglas, a gifted orator, author, abolitionist and escaped slave.

The elementary school's student body is approximately 60% hispanic, 28% African American, 5% Asian and 4% white.  The questions were purportedly written by one but vetted by all nine of the elementary teachers from that school.  

So my concern is the school's obvious focus is on the slave aspect of Mr. Douglas' history writing the third graders' internal script.  These kids are around nine years old. What chance do they have of identifying the peculiar bias of the questions, whether they were written from a racist view point or from an outrage of slavery view point.  Either is possible; only an investigation will reveal which is accurate.  

What is certainly accurate is that the focus of the questions was not math. They weren't even accurate historically.  Mr. Douglas never picked cotton.  He never picked oranges.  He spent most of his young life working inside, not outside. And while he was beaten by his last "master," Edward Covey, Mr. Douglas fought back, beating Covey.  After losing the fight to Mr. Douglas, Covey never attempted to beat him again.  

What also is not accurate is the math.  Each tree had 56 oranges?  How many trees?  You can't answer that question.

If the teachers wanted to include social studies interests in Frederick Douglas in their math questions they had much better, more affirming issues to draw from. For example, they could have asked, "In 1848, if 300 people attended the Seneca Falls Convention on women's rights and a majority were opposed to passing a resolution proposed by Elizabeth Cady Stanton on women's sufferage, and, after Frederick Douglas spoke in favor of the issue stating, 'In this denial of the right to participate in government, not merely the degradation of woman and the perpetuation of a great injustice happens, but the maiming and repudiation of one-half of the moral and intellectual power of the government of the world,' the convention attendees reconsidered the resolution and it passed by a majority, how many more people were persuaded by Mr. Douglas' words to support sufferage for women?"  Okay, not a good math question, but I was always better at social studies.

But the point is that these unfortunate third graders now have a firmly embedded internal tape based upon their teachers' focus. And the children will grow up acting, somewhat, somehow, in accordance with that script.  And because it won't be authentic, because it won't be a genuine response to whatever prompts that tape to run, the children will be the more limited for it.

And so are we, when we act in our married lives from scripts we learned long before we said, "I do." 

Michael Manely

The Manely Firm, P.C.

The value of work

I saw a most wonderful film tonight.  The film was wonderful on many levels, not the least of which that it brought out all three of my boys and I to see it.  But the film also held many meanings, one of which I want to touch on tonight, the value of work.

The film was "Hugo."  The value of work theme involved the boy's passion for fixing machines.  In the movie, the boy appeals to the policeman, "It is my once chance to work, surely you understand that."  The policeman had been significantly injured in The Great War and was working at the one task left to him, policing the train station, which he took great pains to do well.

In our culture we often talk about a work ethic, which I take to mean that you work hard, play by the rules and have a shot at the American Dream.  In this context, the work ethic stands in contrast to the contrived welfare queen role. But there is something profoundly lacking in this ethic.  It is devoid of meaning except for the avoidance of idle-ness.  It is work defined by what it is not.

The meaning of work is entirely different.  This is work as craft.  It is work as the creation of self worth.  On one level it is even a calling, but on any level, it gives meaning and value.  It is an end unto itself.

With our myriad unemployed, they suffer the loss of meaning and value, of self worth, as the days turn into weeks, turn into months, turn into years.  Their unemployment is eviscerating a core for their reason for being.  Loss of employment does more than create critical economic hardship, it creates existential angst.

Familes suffer all the stressors known to human kind, and the long term loss of employment is often one of the worst.  Relationships seem not so fluid as to readily be redefined.  It seems that, by their redefinition they are often torn asunder.  Our culture can decry the many other evils visited upon American families, but joblessness may outrank almost every one of them. 

The Great Depression changed people; it changed society, it changed the way that families function.  I suspect that the bruising the institution of family suffered then was a psychological burden our culture carried for many generations.  In a constant series of over corrections, it may be a burden still felt today.  And here we are, as an intentional society, visiting this beast upon ourselves again.

If we care about families, we would care for families.  We would nurture our community in ways that support the wellbeing of families which we claim are our fundamental units and not visit economic deprivation upon them and threaten them further with even a return to child labor.  The intentional society would take the steps necessary to foster work so that the value of work, the measure of a man, could bring meaning to each and thereby imbue meaning to all.  The intentional society would nurture families, not give them more reasons to come apart. 

May we make it so.

Michael Manely

FindLaw Network
Office Locations

Marietta Office
The Manely Firm, P.C.
7 Atlanta Street, S.E.
Suite C,
Marietta GA 30060

866-687-8561
Marietta Law Office

Atlanta Office
The Manely Firm, P.C.
121 Martin Luther King, Jr. Dr.
Atlanta GA 30303

678-269-6541
Atlanta Law Office

Canton Office
The Manely Firm, P.C.
250 East Main Street
Suite 102S,
Canton, GA 30114

678-269-6541
Canton Law Office

Lawrenceville Office
The Manely Firm, P.C.
413 Constitution Blvd.
Lawrenceville, GA 30046

866-687-8561
Lawrenceville Law Office