BLANK

Expert Witnesses

Home Expert Witnesses

Are there experts who can evaluate parental alienation for a custody case?

There are “expert” witnesses for virtually any and every issue in legal actions. Can judges be bamboozled by pseudo-scientific expert witnesses? Without question. Do some judges who know that the so-called expert witness’s testimony is pseudo-scientific bunk (or at least…

Wadsworth v. Wadsworth – 2022 UT App 5 – marital estate

January 17, 2022

Alimony and Support, Appeal, Assets/Debt/Property, Attorney Fees, Business Interests, Business Valuation, Coping With Divorce, Court Orders, Court Rules, Division of Marital Property, Divorce, Divorce and Taxes, Divorce Attorneys, Divorce Causes, Divorce Costs, Divorce Court, Divorce Fears, Divorce Law, Divorce Lawyers, Divorce Mistakes, Divorce Preparedness, Divorce Procedure, Equity, Evidence, Expert Witnesses, Extramarital affairs/Adultery, Family Law, Finances, Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, Husband's or Wife's Business, Infidelity, Judges, Justice and Equity, Lawyer Fees, Legal System, Marital Debts, Marital Estate, Marital Home, Marital Property, Men's Divorce Issues, Modification of Alimony, Modification of Decree of Divorce, Personal Property, Procedure and Evidence, Property Division, Real Estate/Real Property, Spousal Support, Spouse's Business, Taxation, Utah Code, Utah Court of Appeals Decisions, Utah Law, Valuation, Women's Divorce Issues

appellate case, appellate decision, court of appeals, divorce law, family law, Utah Court of Appeals

2022 UT App 5 THE UTAH COURT OF APPEALS CANDI WADSWORTH, Appellant, v. GUY L. WADSWORTH, Appellee. Opinion No. 20190106-CA No. 20200430-CA Filed January 13, 2022 Third District Court, Salt Lake Department The Honorable Su Chon No. 104904966 Michael D.…

What is the percentage of people who commit/are prosecuted for perjury?

December 17, 2021

Court Rules, Evidence, Expert Witnesses, Testimony, Witness

crime, getting caught, illegal, judge, lawyer, lying under oath, perjury, prosecution

What percentage of people lie while under oath in a courtroom, and how often does someone get prosecuted for perjury? Re: What percentage of people lie under oath in a courtroom: If anyone knows this, I don’t know who he/she/they…

What are legitimate ways to contradict a witness in the court?

July 17, 2021

Dirty Tricks, Discovery, Divorce Fears, Divorce Law, Divorce Mistakes, Evidence, Expert Witnesses, Extramarital affairs/Adultery, Family Law, Fathers' Divorce Issues, Men's Divorce Issues, Mothers' Divorce Issues, Women's Divorce Issues

dirty tricks, discredit, impeach, witness

If you are asking whether there are “legitimate” ways to make truthful witness look inaccurate or dishonest (meaning there are ways to do it that won’t get you in trouble), there are tricks that may and often do work to…

Am I held to what I said first as a witness, even if I immediately corrected my mistake once I realized it?

It is not merely a question of how quickly the witness corrects his or her answer. Sometimes a lawyer will ask a witness for precise details simply not because those details crucial to resolving a particular issue but simply because…

Why is it OK for a parent to be given custody without their kids’ consent?

May 28, 2021

Best Interest of the Child, Child Custody, Child Custody Modification, Custody, Custody Evaluation, Divorce Fears, Divorce Law, Divorce Lawyers, Divorce Mistakes, Divorce Preparedness, Expert Witnesses, Family Law, Fathers' Divorce Issues, GAL (Guardian ad Litem), Holiday Parent-time, Joint Physical Custody, Judges, Legal Custody, Legal System, Men's Divorce Issues, Modification of Child Custody, Modification of Parent-time, Mothers' Divorce Issues, Noncustodial parents, Parent Time, Parental Alienation, Parental Fitness, Parental Rights, Parenting Plan, Women's Divorce Issues

child custody, child custody award, child custody cases, custody and parent time analysis, custody award, custody evaluators, desires Utah Code Section 30–3–10(5)(ii), directly, experiences, free of charge, guardians ad litem, interview children, judge interview, judge interview children, kids’ consent, kids’ input, less time, no cost, not on the record, not talk to children, observations, on the, opinions, plausible excuse, policy, preferences, thousands of dollars, value

Why is it okay for a parent to be given custody without their kids consent or at least their input? This is a great question. I can’t speak for all lawyers, and the laws and rules governing what the courts…

Recent thoughts about family law

Recent thoughts about family law I’ve been prompted recently to express my thoughts and opinions about the judiciary generally in the family law context. Here are a few thoughts I feel are worth sharing: – Too often litigants and attorneys…

Which Is Better: spending thousands on GAL/custody evaluator or $0 on a judge interview?

December 25, 2020

Child Custody, Children in Divorce, Co-parenting, Coping With Divorce, Custody Evaluation, Divorce Fears, Divorce Law, Divorce Mistakes, Divorce Preparedness, Evidence, Expert Witnesses, Fathers' Divorce Issues, GAL (Guardian ad Litem), Judges, Men's Divorce Issues, Modification of Child Custody, Mothers' Divorce Issues, Parent Time, Parental Alienation, Parental Fitness, Parenting Plan, Personality Disorders, Physical Custody, Sexual Abuse, Utah Code, Utah Court Rules, Women's Divorce Issues

24 years, appointed, arguments, children, compelling, court-sponsored hearsay, court's record, custody evaluator, debate, free of charge, GAL, guardian ad litem, inherently traumatic, interview, interview children directly, judge, lack merit, private guardian ad litem, puts them in the middle, qualified, second hand, spend, tens of thousands, third hand, thousands, valid

Which Is Better: spending thousands on GAL/custody evaluator or $0 on a judge interview? How could it be better to spend thousands on a GAL or custody evaluator when the judge can interview children free of charge? This post is…

Is being a divorce lawyer miserable?

June 8, 2020

Child Abuse, Child Custody, Child Support, Children in Divorce, Coping With Divorce, Custody, Custody Evaluation, Divorce Attorneys, Divorce Lawyers, Divorce Procedure, Expert Witnesses, Family Law, Fathers' Divorce Issues, Men's Divorce Issues, Women's Divorce Issues

divorce attorneys, divorce lawyers, miserable

Is being a divorce lawyer miserable? Miserable? Can be (and is) for some divorce attorneys, but for me it’s chronically discouraging. Sure, the human pain and betrayal to which we are exposed is saddening, as is the toll divorce takes on…

2019 UT App 207 – Peeples v. Peeples – modification of child custody

January 7, 2020

Abuse, Best Interest of the Child, Child Abuse, Child Custody, Child Custody Modification, Children in Divorce, Co-parenting, Contempt of Court, Coping With Divorce, Custody, Custody Evaluation, Divorce Fears, Divorce Law, Divorce Lawyers, Divorce Mistakes, Divorce Preparedness, Divorce Procedure, Expert Witnesses, Family Law, Fathers' Divorce Issues, Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, GAL (Guardian ad Litem), Joint Legal Custody, Mediation, Men's Divorce Issues, Modification of Child Custody, Mothers' Divorce Issues, Negotiation, Parenting Plan, Physical Custody, Procedure and Evidence, Protective Orders, Restraining Orders, Sole Custody, Utah Code, Utah Court of Appeals Decisions, Utah Law, Women's Divorce Issues

2019, 2019 UT App 207, best interest, bifurcate, bifurcated decree, children failed to demonstrate substantial change in the circumstances, clear error, custody evaluator, December 19, denied visitation, distinction between stipulated and adjudicated decrees, domestic relations commissioner, emotional, emotional abuse, failed to meet burden to prove change in circumstances, five out of every fourteen, guardian ad litem, in “high conflict” cases burden of demonstrating a change in circumstances is higher than normal, incorrect legal standard decree was stipulated rather than adjudicated, intellectual, joint legal custody, modify divorce decree, moral development, motion to dismiss, no change in circumstances, no separate standard that courts are to apply in high-conflict cases when considering whether a substantial change of circumstances is present in the context of a petition to modify, Opinion No. 20180713-CA, overnights, PEEPLES v. PEEPLES, ping-pong custody awards, presence or absence of a substantial change in circumstances, primary physical custody, protective order, reasonable degree of stability, res judicata, school year, settlement conference, sole custody, sole physical custody, stable employment, stable home environment, summertime, Utah Code Ann. § 30-3-10.4(2)(b), Utah Court of Appeals, violations of decree could be resolved in contempt proceedings, violence

2019 UT App 207 – THE UTAH COURT OF APPEALS ADAM LEGRANDE PEEPLES, Appellee, v. ANNALEISE T. PEEPLES, Appellant. Opinion No. 20180713-CA Filed December 19, 2019 Third District Court, Salt Lake Department The Honorable Andrew H. Stone No. 044901980 Brian…

Have you ever experienced a judge questioning the opposing party?

November 11, 2019

Divorce Law, Divorce Procedure, Evidence, Expert Witnesses

judge, judges questioning witnesses

Have you ever experienced a judge told you “Please sit down, Mr X” without listening to your argument, and then proceeded to question your opponent at length? Yes. Sometimes it’s bush league and unfair. To most judges’ credit, however, this…

Martin v. Kristensen – 2019 UT App 127 – divorce and unlawful detainer

August 7, 2019

Attorney Fees, Divorce Costs, Divorce Law, Divorce Mistakes, Expert Witnesses, Finances, Marital Home, Marital Property, Postnuptial Agreements, Prenuptial Agreements, Real Estate/Real Property, Utah Court of Appeals Decisions, Utah Law

appeal, attorney's fees, divorce, unlawful detainer, Utah Court of Appeals

Martin v. Kristensen – 2019 UT App 127 THE UTAH COURT OF APPEALS YVONNE MARTIN, Appellant, v. PETTER KRISTENSEN AND FRANK O. KRISTENSEN, Appellees. Opinion No. 20160265-CA Filed July 26, 2019 Third District Court, Salt Lake Department The Honorable Todd…

Pulham v. Kirsling – 2018 UT App 65 – custody, parent-time, child support

July 3, 2019

Attorney Fees, Best Interest of the Child, Child Custody, Child Custody Modification, Child Support, Children in Divorce, Co-parenting, Custody, Custody Evaluation, Divorce Court, Divorce Law, Divorce Mistakes, Divorce Preparedness, Divorce Procedure, Domestic Relations Commissioners, Expert Witnesses, Fathers' Divorce Issues, Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, Joint Legal Custody, Joint Physical Custody, Legal Custody, Men's Divorce Issues, Modification of Child Custody, Modification of Parent-time, Parent Time, Petition to Modify Decree of Divorce, Physical Custody, Procedure and Evidence, Relocation, Utah Code, Utah Court of Appeals Decisions, Utah Court Rules, Utah Law

2018, 2018 UT App 65, amended decree, April 12, attorney fees on appeal, change elementary schools, commuting by car, custody evaluation, custody evaluator, final say, friends, income imputed, joint physical and legal custody, Judge Richard D. McKelvie, jurisdiction is limited, Margaret S. Edwards Attorney for Appellant, modification of parent-time, modifying child custody, motion for new trial, newly discovered evidence, No. 104901246, not in child’s best interest, notice of appeal, Office of Recovery Services (ORS), Opinion Nos. 20150577-CA and 20160236-CA, past-due child support, petition to modify custody, primary custodial parent, Pulham v. Kirsling, routine, rule 59(a) Utah Rules of Civil Procedure, Steve S. Christensen and Clinton R. Brimhall Attorneys for Appellee, substantial and material change in circumstances, surroundings, Third District Court Salt Lake Department, unnecessary adjustment, Utah Code section 30-3-35, Utah Court of Appeals

Pulham v. Kirsling – 2018 UT App 65 THE UTAH COURT OF APPEALS KRISTEN PULHAM, Appellee, v. WILLIAM KIRSLING, Appellant. Opinion Nos. 20150577-CA and 20160236-CA Filed April 12, 2018 Third District Court, Salt Lake Department The Honorable Richard D. McKelvie…

State v. Harvey – 2019 UT App 108 – lay versus expert testimony

2019 UT App 108 – State v. Harvey – lay versus expert testimony 2019 UT App 108 THE UTAH COURT OF APPEALS STATE OF UTAH, Appellee, V. RANDY LYNN HARVEY, Appellant. Opinion No. 20170733-CA Filed June 20, 2019 Third District…

LeFevre v. Mackelprang – 2019 UT App 42 – joint custody analysis

2019 UT App 42 – THE UTAH COURT OF APPEALS – LeFevre v. Mackelprang AMELIA GAYATREE LEFEVRE, Appellee, v. CASEY LEE MACKELPRANG, Appellant. Opinion No. 20171006-CA Filed March 28, 2019 Sixth District Court, Panguitch Department The Honorable Paul D. Lyman…

Mental Health Professionals: How to Make Good (and honest) Use of Them in Divorce and Child Custody

Many spouses and parents going through a divorce and child custody case may believe there is value in using mental health professionals. This can be true, if you use mental health professional services correctly. This is a case of the…

Hartvigsen v. Hartvigsen – 2018 UT App 238 – alimony, marital property

2018 UT App 238 THE UTAH COURT OF APPEALS DANIELLE MARIE HARTVIGSEN, Appellant, v. RICHARD MYERS HARTVIGSEN, Appellee. Opinion No. 20160069-CA Filed December 28, 2018 Fourth District Court, Provo Department The Honorable Lynn W. Davis No. 064402132 Danielle Marie Hartvigsen,…

Do experts help in divorce cases? Specifically custody evaluators?

April 3, 2018

Child Custody, Custody, Custody Evaluation, Expert Witnesses, Fathers' Divorce Issues, Men's Divorce Issues, Mothers' Divorce Issues, Women's Divorce Issues

Do experts help in divorce cases? Specifically custody evaluators? That depends on how you define “help,” and if you define “help” as “dramatically improve your chances of success,” then generally speaking the answer is no, they don’t help. Why? Two…

Menu