Absolutely. I think we are beyond that point…
Warmly,
Anne
Anne C. Towey Henninger, of Anne C. Towey, PLLC
Anne C. Towey, PLLC
Main: 952.476.5295 web: <http://www.atowey.com/> www.atowey.com
18305 Minnetonka Blvd, Suite 201
Wayzata, MN 55391
From: CollabLaw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:CollabLaw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of ;
Aaron G. Welt, Ph.D.
Sent: Wednesday, May 30, 2012 10:00 PM
To: CollabLaw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: hirshwoman@xxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [CollabLaw] Process Snag
Anybody concerned about all of the details of this case, some of which
are specific enough to reveal the identity of the participants, being
published in a discoverable electronic venue? Since the present dynamic
of this case is not following a collaborative process (no coach, no
cooperation between attorneys), it is not hard to imagine it breaking
down and litigation ensuing, especially since both parties have already
filed and litigation is on hold.
Aaron
Aaron G. Welt, Ph.D.
261 James St.
Suite 2-C
Morristown, NJ 07960
535 Morris Ave.
Springfield, NJ 07081
973-538-7490
hirshwoman@xxxxxxx <mailto:hirshwoman%40aol.com> wrote:
Thanks Bonnie,
I'm not sure what you mean by this sentence.
If relo agreement conditional upon having a financial agreement in
place by a good stopping point in the UK school year, see if UK
counsel believes that would be enforceable.
Also, the problem is that the other counsel does not want to converse
further about the dynamic that took place between her and my client.
I just want to have a conversation about it and that is making her
feel managed. I feel stifled and don't know which way to turn.
Maybe, I'll write her and ask why she feels managed, that I feel a
need to further converse about it and do we just decide not to have a
further conversation because she feels managed? Maybe I ask her what
is the harm in further conversing? The harm in not conversing is that
communication is stifled when one of us feels there needs to be a
discussion.
The parents don't need a coach...the attorneys do!
Andrea Hirshman, Esq.
Brooklyn, NY
-----Original Message-----
From: Bonnie Brown <bmb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:bmb%40bmbfamilylaw.com> >
To: CollabLaw <CollabLaw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:CollabLaw%40yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wed, May 30, 2012 3:57 pm
Subject: RE: [CollabLaw] Process Snag
Andrea, how were they referred to collaborative ? If they were
represented by separate litigation counsel in UK and/or NY before they
started with you and the other atty, maybe the referral sources
(family counselor, perhaps ?) could help and/or give insight. Are
there coaches or “relationship specialists” for the parents? If not,
maybe time to bring them in. Usually for parents, but many coaches
talk about how they assist with atty behavior and communication as
well. Maybe you could get Mom and her counsel to do “empathy”
exercise by articulating why Dad should be comfortable that Mom will
proceed in good faith to resolve financial issues once she is in UK
and has (as Dad perceives it) everything she wants.
To address the merits, how would Mom make it while financials are
pending ? Does she have enough income on her own ? Maybe Mom could
agree to move out of her “flat” for Dad’s week in UK till further
agreement or court order. Dad could stay there. That way, the kids
would not have to move 1/mo, duplicate or transport their wardrobe,
etc. That would also tend to equalize having skin in the game for
resolving financial issues. How old are kids? School age ? If relo
agreement conditional upon having a financial agreement in place by a
good stopping point in the UK school year, see if UK counsel believes
that would be enforceable. If so, there could be a year or partial
year of a different school if it does not work out, but maybe
negatives offset by the kids’ having the international experience.
Let us know how it turns out.
Best regards,
Bonnie M. Brown
Attorney at Law
Suite1260, Meidinger Tower
462 South Fourth Street
Louisville, KY 40202– 3500
U.S.A.
(502) 589 - 4600 telephone
(502) 584 - 0422 facsimile
The preceding e-mail message (including attachments, if any) contains
information that is confidential, may be protected by the
attorney-client, work product, or other applicable privilege, and may
constitute non-public information and trade secrets. It is intended
to be conveyed only to the designated recipient(s). If you are not an
intended recipient of this e-mail, please notify the sender at (502)
589-4600, and destroy all copies of this transmittal. Please do not
forward this message without my express approval. Unauthorized use,
dissemination, distribution, or reproduction of this message is
strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. Thank You.
Circular 230 Disclosure: Internal Revenue Service regulations provide
that, for the purpose of avoiding certain penalties under the Internal
Revenue Code, taxpayers may rely only on opinions of counsel that meet
specific requirements set forth in the regulations, including a
requirement that such opinions contain extensive factual and legal
discussion and analysis. Any tax advice that may be contained in this
message does not constitute an opinion that meets the requirements of
the regulations. Any such tax advise therefore cannot be used, and
was not intended or written to be used, for the purpose of avoiding
any federal tax penalties that the Internal Revenue Service may
attempt to impose. The legal advice expressed in this message is
being delivered to you solely for your use in connection with the
matters addressed herein and may not be made available to or relied
upon by any other person or entity or used for any other purpose
without my prior written consent.
----------------------------------------------------------
*From:*CollabLaw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:%2ACollabLaw%40yahoogroups.com>
<mailto:CollabLaw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ;<mailto:CollabLaw%40yahoogroups.com> >
[mailto:CollabLaw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ;<mailto:CollabLaw%40yahoogroups.com>
<mailto:CollabLaw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ;<mailto:CollabLaw%40yahoogroups.com> ?>]
*On Behalf Of *Andrea Hirshman
*Sent:* Wednesday, May 30, 2012 2:43 PM
*To:* CollabLaw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:CollabLaw%40yahoogroups.com>
<mailto:CollabLaw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ;<mailto:CollabLaw%40yahoogroups.com> >
*Subject:* [CollabLaw] Process Snag
Dear Colleagues,
I’m looking for some assistance in how to handle a situation that
feels difficult to me but seems less so to my collaborative
counterpart. Husband and Wife, UK citizens, are trying to work out a
parenting plan that will provide meaningful relationship between hands
on dad and two daughters in spite of Mother’s relocation to UK. Dad
has accepted that Mother is miserable here and does not want her to
feel like prisoner and therefore is agreeable to her relocating. His
job has a London satellite office which he can work out of one week
per month – however, his employer says that relocating his job there
full time is not an option. Parents are confident that they can work
out some parenting plan that will meet everyone’s needs. However,
Father will not agree to the relocation unti! l the financials are
worked out because he wants to know that he will be able to
financially afford the parenting plan in place. For example, if he
has to fly to the UK once a month, he needs to know that he will have
sufficient money to support that plan. Also, he wants to have a flat
in the UK so that the girls feel like they have a home. He feels
stability would be compromised if they were coming to a hotel room.
Mother would like to put a parenting plan in place, sign it, and
then take off even if the financial matters are not yet settled – with
her promise that she will continue to negotiate the financial terms.
Father has lost trust in the Mother for various reasons and will not
agree to the relocation until a written agreement is in place. When
this became clear, the Wife’s attorney in agreement with her client’s
claims, told Husband that she saw his use of the Mother’s inability to
relocate without hi! s permission to leverage the situation to get all
the financial agreem ents that he wanted. The Husband, who remains
cool as a cucumber, asked his wife’s attorney what she meant and she
reiterated. He explained that his UK collaborative attorney told him
that without a written agreement, if he agreed to his wife’s
relocation, she could open the whole matter up in the UK courts. The
case is somewhat complicated by the fact that right before entering
collaborative law, the Wife started an action in the UK courts
regarding the financials of the marriage – in hopes that a decision
regarding the home they’ve built there would be made in her favor.
The husband filed in NY immediately after and moved in the UK for
dismissal for lack of jurisdiction. Both cases are on hold.
At the end of the meeting, my client and I debriefed and he was
furious at the other attorney – felt attacked and felt there was no
need for him to! feel that from more than his wife. After my debrief
with my client, the other attorney and I debriefed and I shared that
my client felt attack and was very upset. I shared some of what he
said the other attorney felt as if I was just saying it to humiliate
her – turn the screw. I apologized and said that I was sharing in the
hope that we could discuss how to address the situation. We discussed
the substance a bit more to better understand where she was coming
from and she didn’t realize that my client was concerned that the Wife
would relocate and then try to use the UK courts for the financial
relief she seeks. Wife’s Attorney offered that the Agreement could
include a provision that NY law would be applied. I asked whether she
thought some sort of acknowledgment of her misunderstanding, or an
apology would be in order to which she replied that since she was
writing the minutes, she would draft them in a way that will !
address the situation - she’ll include her new understandi ng in the
minutes. I’ve read the draft minutes and feel they do not adequately
address the situation.
After receiving the draft minutes, my client wrote me an email
explaining how he felt and reflecting on the session. I wrote the
Wife’s attorney wondering whether we could talk a bit more about the
dynamic between her and my client, informing her of my client’s email,
and suggested sharing it with her so we could figure out together how
to use his reflections to make the process even stronger. The Wife’s
attorney responded that she is feeling somewhat managed by me and
feels that she and my client should work it out themselves at the next
session. I’m feeling stifled. I feel like an apology is in order
to restore my client’s trust in the process and in the Wife’s
attorney. My hope is that the other attorne! y would in the beginning
explain her misunderstanding and apologize for lashing out. Clearly,
the other attorney is opposed to the idea of making an apology of
sort. I’m not sure why? Is it that it feels humiliating to her (and
my goal is not to humiliate her – I don’t view apologizing for a
mistake as reason for humiliation – I view it as strength of
character)…Or is it that she feels an apology would not be helpful?
Is it best to remain silent and let the chips fall where they fall at
the next meeting – if my client is brave enough to say something?
Where does that leave me with my client? Do I tell my client to email
the Wife’s attorney directly? Will he wonder why I am not having the
conversation with the other attorney? Do I tell him that I tried and
that the other attorney did not want to discuss it with anyone except
him? Does that look like I’m not behind him? ! And so on, and so on.
Any insights would be so so appreciated.< o>
Thank you.
Collaboratively yours,
Andrea
Andrea Hirshman, Esq.
Law & Mediation Offices of Andrea Hirshman
*_Main Office & Mailing Address:_*
30 Ocean Parkway Suite 3F
Brooklyn, N.Y. 11218
917-969-6416
Familymediationmatters.com
Andrea.hirshman@xxxxxxxxx <mailto:Andrea.hirshman%40gmail.com>
<mailto:Andrea.hirshman@xxxxxxxxx ;<mailto:Andrea.hirshman%40gmail.com> >
*_Manhattan_**_Satellite Office for Appointments_*
225 Broadway Suite 2510
New York, NY 10007
