Law Blog

Law BlogLegal Blog on immigration, bankruptcy, family law (divorce, annulment and legal separation), personal injury, real estate, wills and estate matters.enWed, 29 Apr 2026 18:39:25 -04002164Jeffrey B. PeltzImmigrationFamily LawHow to Protect Yourself and Your Family If You Are In The U.S. IllegallyAlthough some in the media may tell you otherwise, if you are in the United States illegally you are protected by U.S. laws, including the Constitution. This is true whether you have entered illegally or have overstayed your visa. Especially now, it is important you know your legal rights....Fri, 24 Mar 2017 00:00:00 -0400Although some in the media may tell you otherwise, if you are in the United States illegally you are <a href="http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/immigration/255281-yes-illegal-aliens-have-constitutional-rights" target="_blank">protected</a> by U.S. laws, including the Constitution. This is true whether you have entered illegally or have overstayed your visa. Especially now, it is important you <a href="https://www.aclu.org/feature/know-your-rights-discrimination-against-immigrants-and-muslims"></a><a href="https://www.aclu.org/feature/know-your-rights-discrimination-against-immigrants-and-muslims" target="_blank">know your legal rights</a>. The following is a very brief outline of some of your legal rights. As with any laws, there are often exceptions to laws described below. Use the links in this blog to learn more about your rights and those exceptions. If it wasn’t bad enough, that you had to beware of authorities, you also need to be aware of scammers. They have been <a href="http://time.com/4672588/new-york-attorney-general-schneiderman-fraud-alert-ice-immigration-scams/"></a><a href="http://time.com/4672588/new-york-attorney-general-schneiderman-fraud-alert-ice-immigration-scams/" target="_blank">reports</a>of people posing as ICE officers and demanding money from people or telling them that they would arrest them. As New York Attorney General <a href="https://ag.ny.gov/press-release/ag-schneiderman-issues-urgent-fraud-alert-ice-immigration-scams"></a><a href="https://ag.ny.gov/press-release/ag-schneiderman-issues-urgent-fraud-alert-ice-immigration-scams" target="_blank">Eric Schneiderman</a>has said (ICE) agents will never ask you for money or threaten detainment or deportation if you do not pay them. Real ICE agents, or for that matter the police, don’t have the legal authority to force their way into you home without a search warrant signed by a judge. The U.S. Constitution provides you <a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/fourth_amendment" target="_blank">the right against unreasonable searches</a>. Don’t let them into your home. If you do let them in, they can look around and take you or others into custody. There is an excellent short outline of <a href="https://www.aclu.org/files/kyr/MKG17-KYR-PoliceImmigrationFBI-OnePager-English-v01.pdf"></a><a href="https://www.aclu.org/files/kyr/MKG17-KYR-PoliceImmigrationFBI-OnePager-English-v01.pdf" target="_blank">your rights</a>that is provided by the ACLU. I suggest you read and print it. In addition to not letting ICE agents or police in, unless they show you a search warrant signed by a judge, you should not say anything. The U.S. Constitution give you <a href="https://www.justia.com/criminal/procedure/miranda-rights/right-to-silence/" target="_blank">the right to be silent.</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/UNITEDWEDREAM/status/830147650259410944"></a><a href="https://twitter.com/UNITEDWEDREAM/status/830147650259410944" target="_blank">Make a record</a>of what is going on. If you have a cell phone, take a video of what is going on. Try to get the names of the people. Take photos. Write down details, especially if you don’t have a cell phone. If you get arrested, contact an <a href="http://www.aaalawyer.com/Area-of-law/Immigration.aspx" target="_blank">experienced immigration lawyer</a> to represent you with your <a href="http://www.aaalawyer.com/Area-of-law/Immigration/Deportation.aspx" target="_blank">deportation.</a> You have rights and will need someone who can fight for you. It’s a good idea to line up such a lawyer before you find yourself in such a situation. <a href="http://immigration.lawyers.com/deportation/immigrants-prepare-for-worse-case-deportation.html"></a><a href="http://immigration.lawyers.com/deportation/immigrants-prepare-for-worse-case-deportation.html" target="_blank">Make a plan</a>of what your family will do if you are arrested. Your spouse, significant other, or close friends should know who you work for so they can inform your employer and collect any wages owed you. You should choose who will care for your child. Be sure that the school knows who that person is and you have provided written authorization. You should also provide your banking information. Even better, you should put someone else on your bank account so that he or she has access to the money in the account if needed. If you are arrested by ICE you may not be able to easily contact your family or friends. They need to know how to look for you if you are taken by ICE. There is a <a href="https://locator.ice.gov/odls/homePage.do"></a><a href="https://locator.ice.gov/odls/homePage.do" target="_blank">website</a>provided by ICE that can be searched to look for you. These are difficult times for you. By being familiar with your legal rights and taking the time and effort to make a detailed written plan you can help protect yourself and your family.2199Jeffrey B. PeltzArea of LawFamily LawOutlaw Rabbis Using Torture to Get Get Get ArrestedRabbi Martin Wolmark, 57, an orthodox rabbi from Monsey, New York has been sentenced to more than three years in prison for his part in a ring that used coercion and torture in order to get Jewish men to agree to a religions divorce. The ring, which included Rabbi Mendel Espstein of Brooklyn were...Tue, 15 Dec 2015 00:00:00 -0500<a href="http://www.lohud.com/story/news/crime/2015/12/14/martin-wolmark-monsey-rabbi/77321860/?from=global&sessionKey=&autologin=" target="_blank">Rabbi Martin Wolmark</a>, 57, an orthodox rabbi from Monsey, New York has been sentenced to more than three years in prison for his part in a ring that used coercion and torture in order to get Jewish men to agree to a religions divorce. The ring, which included <a href="http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/brooklyn/bklyn-rabbi-charged-100-000-torture-husbands-divorce-feds-article-1.1481722" target="_blank">Rabbi Mendel Espstein</a> of Brooklyn were active from 2009 to 2013 and involved payment of large sums of money for their services. The tools used included handcuffs and electric cattle prods. <a href="http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/rabbi-10-years-beating-jewish-men-resisting-divorce-article-1.2466800" target="_blank">Rabbi Mendel Epstein</a>, who is 70, was sentenced for 10 years in prison. As discussed a <a href="http://www.aaalawyer.com/New-York-Lawyer-Blog/ArticleID/43/Man-Refuses-to-Give-His-Wife-Religious-Divorce-Marries-Another.aspx" target="_blank">previous article</a>, under Jewish law the man must cooperate in order for a Jewish divorce, which is known as a get to be given. If he man refuses to cooperate there can be no get and accordingly, the woman may never remarry in the Jewish religion. This is a real problem to a woman that is orthodox. There are organization such as the <a href="http://www.getora.org/" target="_blank">Organization for the Resolution of Agunot</a> to help such woman. Traditionally Rabbis would discuss the matter of a get with the man and try to convince him of cooperating in the get. If the man could not be persuaded to do the right thing, then public shaming of a man could also be a possibility. However Rabbi Wolmark and his associates went well over the legal line by holding the men against their wills and<a href="http://www.lohud.com/story/news/crime/2015/12/14/martin-wolmark-monsey-rabbi/77321860/?from=global&sessionKey=&autologin=" target="_blank"> torturing </a>them. The ring of outlaw Rabbis were<a href="http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/nov/19/3-new-york-men-sentenced-for-divorce-coercion/" target="_blank"> discovered </a>when an undercover FBI woman approached Rabbi Wolmark seeking a get. With the undercover woman FBI agent was an uncover FBI male agent posing as her brother. Rabbi Womark and the convicted Rabbi Mendel Epstein openly discuss their plans to kidnap and torture the husband in order to obtain his permission for the get. Most of the Rabbis arrested were arrested at the warehouse they were planning on holding and torturing the man. They had with them in their possession several items, including handcuffs and electric cattle prods. Although this is a colorful story, it is a symptom of a real problem, that is that the man controls the process of obtain a religious Jewish divorce. New York has tried to deal with this problem by passing a <a href="http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/nycode/DOM/13/253" target="_blank">law</a> which requires every couple when divorcing sign an affidavit stating that if they married religiously that they would cooperate in a religious divorce. Of course this only helps if the man wants a civil divorce and the divorce takes place in New York.2202Jeffrey B. PeltzArea of LawFamily LawMarriage Equality is Now the Law Throughout the United StatesThanks to the U.S. Supreme Court ruling on June 26, 2015, in the matter of Obergefell v. Hodges, same sex couples now have the right to marry throughout the United States. Further, every state must also recognize the same sex marriages performed in other states. The right for same sex couples to...Tue, 07 Jul 2015 00:00:00 -0400Thanks to the<a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/27/us/supreme-court-same-sex-marriage.html?_r=0" target="_blank"> U.S. Supreme Court </a>ruling on June 26, 2015, in the matter of <a href="http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/14pdf/14-556_3204.pdf" target="_blank">Obergefell v. Hodges</a><a href="http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/14pdf/14-556_3204.pdf" target="_self">,</a> same sex couples now have the right to marry throughout the United States. Further, every state must also recognize the same sex marriages performed in other states. The right for same sex couples to marry has come about in a relatively short period of time. Less than 20 years ago, Congress passed and President Clinton signed the<a href="http://www.msnbc.com/the-last-word/how-and-why-doma-became-law-1996" target="_blank">Defense of Marriage Act</a>(DOMA). <a href="http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c104:H.R.3396.ENR:" target="_blank">DOMA</a> defined marriage as a marriage between a man and woman. Further, DOMA stated that, for federal rights and benefits, such as filing income taxes and sponsoring a spouse, recognition would not be given to same sex couples that married. In addition to DOMA, many states outlawed same sex marriage either by statute or by a voter referendum. <a href="http://www.pewforum.org/2015/07/29/graphics-slideshow-changing-attitudes-on-gay-marriage/" target="_blank">Public sentiment regarding same sex marriage has also substantially changed </a>over a relatively short period of time. Just 14 years ago, only 35% of the population approved of marriage between same sex partners. Now, 57% of the population approve of marriage equality. In 2013, the U.S. Supreme Court decided in <a href="http://www.aaalawyer.com/New-York-Lawyer-Blog/ArticleID/24/What-the-Supreme-Court-Ruling-on-DOMA-Means-for-Same-Sex-Couples.aspx" target="_blank">the </a><a href="http://www.aaalawyer.com/New-York-Lawyer-Blog/ArticleID/24/What-the-Supreme-Court-Ruling-on-DOMA-Means-for-Same-Sex-Couples.aspx" target="_blank">Winsor</a> case that the section in DOMA that stated that federal recognition would not be given to a couple legally married in a state that allowed same sex marriage was unconstitutional. However, the Supreme Court did not go as far as to say that same sex marriage should be legal in all states. In 2003, Massachusetts became the first state to <a href="http://www.freedomtomarry.org/pages/history-and-timeline-of-marriage" target="_blank">legalize same sex marriage</a>. After that, a trickle of states followed suit. In recent years, the trickle became a torrent of states to legalize same sex marriage. This trend was substantially enhanced when district federal courts began ruling in favor of marriage equality for all. Then the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled against same sex marriage, which caused a conflict between federal circuit courts and which was resolved by the Supreme Court in the Obergefell case. <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/how-jim-obergefell-became-the-face-of-the-supreme-court-gay-marriage-case/2015/04/06/3740433c-d958-11e4-b3f2-607bd612aeac_story.html" target="_blank">James Obergefell and John Arthur</a> lived together for many years in a committed relationship. When John’s state of health became poor due to amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS), they decided to fly from their home state of Ohio, which did not allow same sex marriage, to Maryland, which did. They flew in a medical transport plane and married while in the plane on the tarmac in Maryland. Although James and John were married in a state that allowed same sex couples to marry, when John died four months later, Ohio refused to recognize their marriage as legal. Accordingly, Ohio refused to list James as the spouse on John’s death certificate. James sued to have his marriage recognized and lost in the federal district court. The Obergefell case was consolidated with thirteen other cases, in which same sex couples had sued to gain marital rights and lost in the federal district court.In deciding that same sex couples had the same rights to marry as opposite sex couples,<a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonkblog/wp/2015/06/26/the-one-supreme-court-paragraph-on-love-that-gay-marriage-supporters-will-never-forget/" target="_blank"> Justice Kenney closed by so eloquently stated</a> the following: “No union is more profound than marriage, for it embodies the highest ideals of love, fidelity, devotion, sacrifice, and family. In forming a marital union, two people become something greater than once they were. As some of the petitioners in these cases demonstrate, marriage embodies a love that may endure even past death. It would misunderstand these men and women to say they disrespect the idea of marriage. Their plea is that they do respect it, respect it so deeply that they seek to find its fulfillment for themselves. Their hope is not to be condemned to live in loneliness, excluded from one of civilization’s oldest institutions. They ask for equal dignity in the eyes of the law. The Constitution grants them that right. It is so ordered.”2213Jeffrey B. PeltzArea of LawFamily LawLife after DivorceFrom my own personal experience, there is nothing more satisfying than a good marriage. However, if your marriage isn’t satisfying, and you have already tried unsuccessfully to save your relationship with your spouse, divorce may provide you with freedom and the opportunity for a happier life. It...Fri, 31 Oct 2014 00:00:00 -0400From my own personal experience, there is nothing more satisfying than a good marriage. However, if your marriage isn’t satisfying, and you have already tried unsuccessfully to save your relationship with your spouse, divorce may provide you with freedom and the opportunity for a happier life. It is far better to be divorced and have peace in your life than to be stuck in a miserable marriage. I speak from personal experience. I am on my third marriage. When I was only 20, I married to escape an unpleasant home life, and I married someone who had her own issues. After three years of an unhappy marriage, we divorced. After a short time of dating, I met someone whom I thought would be a good partner in my life. Unfortunately, we were two very different people. I preferred the outdoors and nature; she preferred the nightlife. We divorced after five years. Shortly after my second divorce, I met a woman, whom I married two years later. We have a son and have been happily married now for more than 26 years. Although I made the wrong decisions in getting married the first two times, I recognized my errors and made the difficult decisions to get out. This is an important lesson. If you made a mistake in marrying someone who is not right for you, get out, even if you have made the same mistake before. With the benefit of hard learned lessons, I made a much better choice the third time around. My wife and I are sharing a wonderful life together. Experts in marriage and divorce, such as Dr. Phil, have useful and practical advice on <a href="http://www.drphil.com/articles/article/213">life after divorce</a>. No matter how miserable you may feel, it is important to remember that life goes on after divorce. Some people feel the immediate rush of joy and freedom upon getting divorced, while others feel mostly sad and down. I have seen these differing reactions when I have informed my clients over the years that their divorces have become final. Over the past 25 years, I have had such conversations more than 10,000 times. Most often, the client is relieved and even happy, but sometimes such news is received with sadness. Divorce is an opportunity to find yourself and to pursue your interests. It may even open the door to new interests and friends. Upon my first divorce, I decided to start running. I was out of shape. The first time I ran, I got winded after one block. But, I kept at it and have since enjoyed many years of running miles at a time. Last year, I ran the <a href="http://www.nyrr.org/races-and-events/2013/brooklyn-half-marathon">Brooklyn Half Marathon</a> in just over two hours. The <a href="http://www.tcsnycmarathon.org/">New York Marathon</a> will take place this coming Sunday. One participant also discovered running after her divorce. Like me, she started off barely able to run at all, but she has since run several marathons. If you are divorced and are considering having sex, be sure to have <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jackie-pilossoph/lets-talk-about-sex-after_b_5547784.html">safe sex</a>. This is especially important if you haven’t been dating for many years. If you are sexually active, you can get <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/19/opinion/sunday/emanuel-sex-and-the-single-senior.html?_r=0">sexually transmitted diseases</a>. If you take the proper precautions, sex after divorce can be very<a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/debbie-burgin/the-joys-of-sex-after-divorce_b_5513220.html"> enjoyable</a>. I would love to hear your story of life after divorce. It may also be helpful to others. Please post your story in the comment section.2227Jeffrey B. PeltzArea of LawFamily LawMan Refuses to Give His Wife Religious Divorce Marries AnotherMeir Kin divorced his wife in California, however he refused to give his wife a religious divorce; which in the Jewish religion is known as a get. A woman that was married in a Jewish religious ceremony can’t remarry in the religion unless she is given the get. This is essential to an observant...Fri, 18 Apr 2014 00:00:00 -0400Meir Kin divorced his wife in California, however he <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/22/us/a-wedding-amid-cries-of-unfinished-business-from-a-marriage.html?emc=eta1">refused</a> to give his wife a religious divorce; which in the Jewish religion is known as a<a href="http://bethdin.org/gittin/" target="_blank"> get</a>. A woman that was married in a Jewish religious ceremony can’t remarry in the religion unless she is given the get. This is essential to an observant Jew. Denying her a get is denying her the opportunity to marry again. In fact there is a term for such a woman, which is <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agunah">agunah</a>, translated to English meaning “chained” or “anchored” Although the Jewish orthodox and conservative communities absolutely require a get to remarry, the <a href="http://www.jwi.org/page.aspx?pid=1062">reform movement</a> does not. The reform will consider a civil divorce adequate. This may be a problem if someone married in a reformed ceremony, then doesn’t obtain a get and later wants to marry in the orthodox or conservative movements. In New York <a href="http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/nycode/DOM/13/253">section 253</a> of the Domestic Relations Law was passed in 1983 to deal with this situation. It required every couple divorcing, regardless of their religion, to sign affidavits saying that he or she has taken, or will take, all steps within his or her power to remove all barriers to the other spouse’s remarriage; or the other spouse has waived in writing the applicant’s obligation to file the statement. If the husband refuses to cooperate he can be denied a civil divorce. Unfortunately, this would be the only recourse if section 253 is not followed. However even this does not provide a perfect solution. The husband can always get around the law by getting a divorce outside of New York since New York is the only state that has the requirement of removing barriers to a religious divorce. Traditionally, pressure of the Jewish community would cause most men to cooperate in providing the get. In fact, in another recent case, that of <a href="http://nypost.com/2013/11/04/orthodox-jewish-womans-plea-for-a-divorce/">Gital Dodelson</a>, such pressure did <a href="http://www.jta.org/2014/02/05/news-opinion/united-states/gital-dodelson-agunah-featured-in-n-y-post-obtains-get">cause</a> the husband to provide a get. Sometimes some people get carried away and become too aggressive in applying pressure. Such was the case in a <a href="http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/10/10/rabbis-fbi-divorce-sting/2959369/">recent case</a> when several men, including a rabbi were arrested by the FBI. Among the allegations are that they tortured up to 24 husbands, using among other things, a cattle prod, to convince men to provide gets. In the case of Ms. Kin, so far private and public shaming has not caused Mr. Kin to cooperate in giving a get. Unfortunately, such is the case in many similar situations. If you find yourself in such an unfortunate situation there are support groups such as <a href="http://www.getora.org/">Organization for the Resolution of Agunot</a>.2229Jeffrey B. PeltzArea of LawFamily LawMore Older Married Couples are Deciding to DivorceWhile divorce rates are either stabilizing or even decreasing across American amongst most demographics, divorce rates amongst Americans over the age of 50 are rising. Today, with an over 15% increase in the divorce rate in the last 20 years, more Americans over the age of 50 are, for the first...Tue, 08 Apr 2014 00:00:00 -0400While divorce rates are either stabilizing or even decreasing across American amongst most demographics, divorce rates amongst Americans over the age of 50 are rising. Today, with an over <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/22/fashion/weddings/divorce-after-50-grows-more-common.html?_r=2&">15% increase</a> in the divorce rate in the last 20 years, more Americans over the age of 50 are, for the first time, divorced than widowed. In 2009 alone, over 600,000 Americans over 50 filed for divorce, making older couples 2.5 times more likely to get divorced than younger couples. Dubbed “Gray Divorces,” sociologists attribute several changing socio-economic factors to the rising divorce rate. Since divorces in all age groups are statistically<a href="http://www.bgsu.edu/arts-and-sciences/center-for-family-demographic-research.html"> more likely</a> to be initiated by the woman, the increasing economic autonomy and opportunities for women have allowed them to be able to support themselves after a divorce. In the past, women have had to rely on men for financial stability and often have stayed in a marriage they felt was no longer working in order to sustain themselves. Now, with <a href="http://www.dol.gov/wb/stats/recentfacts.htm">women having a higher rate of education and a lower unemployment rate than men</a> in the United States, they are able to support themselves and feel more secure in their decision to leave a dissatisfying marriage. Another legal factor that has contributed to the rising rate of divorce amongst older Americans is the spread of no-fault divorce. In 2010, New York State became the last state to adopt laws that allowed married couples to file for a no-fault divorce. In the past, New York State only allowed divorce if a spouse could prove that infidelity, adultery, cruelty, abandonment, or imprisonment had occurred. Since these faults require physical evidence and proof, recognizing “no-fault” divorce may have removed the emotional and bureaucratic burden of accusations and trial, thus encouraging older couples that no longer have feelings for each other to file for divorce without blame or fault. As an example, the <a href="http://nypost.com/2012/01/26/first-no-fault-divorce-granted/">first no-fault divorce in New York State</a> after the law had been passed in 2010 was that of an 79 year old woman who had no ill will towards her husband, but felt that the marriage was “irretrievably broken.” However, as with any divorce, the process of separating may be emotionally taxing and exhausting. For older couples, there is a greater concern of stress related to the divorce proceedings having an impact on their physical and mental health. Furthermore, older couples still have to consider the same legal issues as all couples, such as a fair appraisal and distribution of assets, property rights, spousal support, and healthcare coverage. As divorce rates for older Americans rise, there’s a higher need for professional and legal advice to ensure a fair asset distribution, and to minimize the emotional stress for all parties involved by streamlining the legal process. There’s no age too old to pursue a happier life. Contacting an experienced attorney to negotiate a fair agreement for both parties is the first step to starting a new future.2239Jeffrey B. PeltzArea of LawFamily LawSame Sex Marriage UpdateIf you are married and live in New York or any of the growing number of jurisdictions in the United States that recognize same-sex marriages, the death of Section 3 of DOMA (the Defense Of Marriage Act) means that, if you are a married gay or lesbian couple, you will enjoy all of the rights and...Sat, 14 Dec 2013 00:00:00 -0500If you are married and live in New York or any of the growing number of jurisdictions in the United States that recognize same-sex marriages, the death of Section 3 of DOMA (the Defense Of Marriage Act) means that, if you are a married gay or lesbian couple, you will enjoy all of the rights and responsibilities of a heterosexual married couple. Prior to the Supreme Court’s ruling that DOMA is unconstitutional, if you were a legally married same-sex couple, DOMA denied you federal benefits. Among the many results of this law, such couples had to file separate state and federal income tax returns. In addition, if one partner in the married couple died and left a significant estate to the surviving partner, the surviving partner was required to pay significant estate taxes. In fact, this particular situation in the Windsor case prompted the challenge to DOMA that was decided by the Supreme Court on June 26, 2013. Based on the Court’s decision, you might think that the matter is over and that we are now past this issue. However, this is not the case. If you are a legally married gay or lesbian couple and move to a state that does not recognize the right of a same-sex couple to marry, will you still be legally recognized as a married couple in your new state of residence and have all of the rights of a legally married couple? The answer is not clear at this time. In the Windsor case, the Supreme Court did not address section 2 of DOMA. Section 2 provides that a state is not required to recognize the marriage of a couple that was married in a state that allowed such marriages. Under Article IV, Section 1 of the United States Constitution, known as the "Full Faith and Credit Clause," each state is required to recognize laws of another state. This clause should require a state that does not provide for same-sex marriage to recognize the marriage of a couple legally married in another state. However, until the Supreme Court addresses this issue, each state will be free to do as each it pleases.2242Jeffrey B. PeltzArea of LawFamily LawBankruptcyAccidentsWills and EstatesReal EstateImmigrationHow Can a 1 Star Lawyer Get 5 Stars Reviews?How can a really bad lawyer get dozens of outstanding reviews on the internet? I know an attorney, who for obvious reasons I won’t identify, who gives incorrect legal advice, and yet gets rave reviews and top rankings in Google. He has told people that they can file bankruptcy when they can’t....Mon, 23 Sep 2013 00:00:00 -0400How can a really bad lawyer get dozens of outstanding reviews on the internet? I know an attorney, who for obvious reasons I won’t identify, who gives incorrect legal advice, and yet gets rave reviews and top rankings in Google. He has told people that they can file bankruptcy when they can’t. Even worst, he has told people that shouldn’t file bankruptcy that they can. Such legal advice could have adverse effects, such as losing their homes. I know this these things because some of the people that have gone to him have had the good sense to seek second opinions and have visited me. Being an ethical person, and never writing my own reviews, I feel strongly about this problem. Morally I find faked reviews offensive and in a very real practical way it financially hurts me, my staff and family. I have reported the faked reviews to Google on a number of occasions. Their only response was a form letter saying that they were very busy and they suggested that I take up the matter with the offending lawyer. The practice of posting faked reviews has become such a common problem that one can’t read reviews without the thought, are these real reviews? <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/23/technology/give-yourself-4-stars-online-it-might-cost-you.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0">The New York Times</a> had a story on this issue today. If something isn’t done about this problem reviews will have be of little assistance in determining whether a service or product is good or not. Just last night, when I was shopping online for hiking pants, I faced this dilemma. There were 103 reviews; most were rave reviews and a few really bad ones. What was the truth? Were the bad ones real and did the company buy dozens and dozens of faked reviews to drown out the real bad ones? A few companies like Yelp are trying to deal with faxed reviews. In fact they <a href="http://blogs.lawyers.com/2013/09/yelp-sues-for-fake-reviews/">sued</a> an attorney for faxing reviews. On the other hand, Yelp “filtered” out 3 of 4 reviews that clients had left on their website for <a href="http://www.yelp.com/biz/law-offices-of-jeffrey-b-peltz-pc-brooklyn">me</a> because they suspected that they were faxed. If they really can eliminate most faked reviews I guess it might be worth the elimination of 75% of my legitimate reviews, but there is no way of knowing how successful they are in filtering out faked reviews; and being wrong 75% of the time isn’t very impressive. In order to counter the faked review problem I propose that you, the consumer, write reviews, both good and bad, when appropriate. Also, when you read reviews, keep in mind - are these real reviews or am I being lied to? For more on this subject you may view the <a href="http://www.aaalawyer.com/LinkClick.aspx?link=http%3a%2f%2fwww.npr.org%2fblogs%2falltechconsidered%2f2013%2f09%2f23%2f225455596%2ffake-reviewers-get-zero-stars-from-new-york-attorney-generalhttp%3a%2f%2f&tabid=680&portalid=1&mid=3869&language=en-US">NPR</a> story on fake reviews and the Forbes story on <a href="http://www.forbes.com/sites/jimhandy/2012/08/16/think-yelp-is-unbiased-think-again/" target="_blank">Yelp</a>.2245Jeffrey B. PeltzArea of LawFamily LawWhat the Supreme Court Ruling on DOMA Means for Same Sex Couples?If you are married and live in New York or any of the other 13 jurisdictions in the United States that recognize same-sex marriages*, the death of Section 3 of DOMA (the Defense Of Marriage Act) means that, if you are a married gay or lesbian couple, you will enjoy all of the rights and...Tue, 09 Jul 2013 00:00:00 -0400If you are married and live in New York or any of the other 13 jurisdictions in the United States that recognize same-sex marriages*, the death of Section 3 of DOMA (the Defense Of Marriage Act) means that, if you are a married gay or lesbian couple, you will enjoy all of the rights and responsibilities of a heterosexual married couple. Prior to the Supreme Court’s ruling that DOMA is unconstitutional, if you were a legally married same-sex couple, DOMA denied you federal benefits. Among the many results of this law, such couples had to file separate state and federal income tax returns. In addition, if one partner in the married couple died and left a significant estate to the surviving partner, the surviving partner was required to pay significant estate taxes. In fact, this particular situation in the <a href="http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/12pdf/12-307_6j37.pdf">Windsor</a> case prompted the challenge to DOMA that was decided by the Supreme Court on June 26, 2013. Based on the Court’s decision, you might think that the matter is over and that we are now past this issue. However, this is not the case. If you are a legally married gay or lesbian couple and move to a state that does not recognize the right of a same-sex couple to marry, will you still be legally recognized as a married couple in your new state of residence and have all of the rights of a legally married couple? The answer is not clear at this time. In the Windsor case, the Supreme Court did not address section 2 of DOMA. Section 2 provides that a state is not required to recognize the marriage of a couple that was married in a state that allowed such marriages. Under Article IV, Section 1 of the United States Constitution, known as the "Full Faith and Credit Clause," each state is required to recognize laws of another state. This clause should require a state that does not provide for same-sex marriage to recognize the marriage of a couple legally married in another state. However, until the Supreme Court addresses this issue, each state will be free to do as each pleases. Although the Supreme Court struck section 3 of DOMA down as unconstitutional, there is still a question about the ability of many same-sex couples to receive federal rights. Say you are a same-sex couple, married in New York, and then move to Florida, a state that does not recognize your right to marry. It is clear that you will not be able to get any benefits afforded under Florida law to married couples, but how about federal benefits? Since DOMA is gone, you would think that you will at least be able to receive federal benefits; but this may not be the case. Some federal benefits are based upon where you are married, and some are based upon where you reside. Accordingly, you will be entitled to receive the benefits that arise from the place of your marriage. However, you will be out of luck with regard to the benefits that arise from your state of residence. You can expect legal challenges to be brought by legally married same-sex couples who move to states that do not recognize their marriages. This issue will work its way up through the courts until it reaches the Supreme Court. Hopefully, the Supreme Court will accept one or more of these cases and will finally decide that all couples, regardless of their sexual preferences, have the right to marry and have the same legal rights and responsibilities, regardless of where they reside within the United States. *The following U.S. jurisdictions recognize same-sex marriage at this time: California, Connecticut, Delaware, Iowa, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Hampshire, New York, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington and Washington D.C. In addition, five Native American tribes have made same-sex marriage legal.2246Jeffrey B. PeltzArea of LawFamily LawAnnulment in New York ExplainedTo understand annulment, you must forget everything you think you know about annulment. Many people think that a marriage that lasts for only a short period of time can be annulled. Over the years, many people have asked me to have their marriages annulled, because their marriage was never...Mon, 20 May 2013 00:00:00 -0400To understand annulment, you must forget everything you think you know about annulment. Many people think that a marriage that lasts for only a short period of time can be annulled. Over the years, many people have asked me to have their marriages annulled, because their marriage was never consummated. Many people think that, if their marriage is annulled, there will be no record that they were married. Many believe that having their marriage annulled is a simple process, perhaps accomplished by filing a form where they got their marriage license. None of these popular beliefs is correct. It is best to think of annulment as another type of divorce. Both annulment and divorce begin with an action in the Supreme Court of New York. Both spouses must consent to the annulment or divorce or the opposing spouse must be served with a summons. Your pleading must be filed with the court. In a divorce, you get a judgment of divorce from the court ending the marriage. In an annulment, you get a judgment of annulment from the court ending the marriage. Both judgments get filed with the county clerk’s office. Whether a marriage ends in divorce or annulment, the marriage records are not eliminated. There is no practical difference other than that your friends, family and future spouse may think that the annulment of your marriage means that you were never really married. Annulments are mostly sought on the grounds of fraud in situations when one spouse tricked the other into getting married. The fraud must be substantial to the point that a reasonable person would not have married if the truth had been known. For example, if a woman induces a man to marry her by claiming to be pregnant when she is not, she has committed fraud that will justify an annulment. Another classic fraud occurs when one party commits to having children once married but did not mean it. To prevail in an annulment action, the lying party must admit to the fraud, and a witness must confirm the fraud. Further, the person seeking the annulment must file the action within three years of discovering the fraud. Although much less common, an annulment can be based on the claim that the marriage was void from the beginning. This means that, as a matter of law, the marriage was not legal when it took place. For example, a parent cannot legally marry his or her child, and a brother cannot legally marry his sister. In addition to a civil annulment, there is a religious annulment. Lawyers are not involved in obtaining a religious annulment – for that, consult your clergyperson. You may still be able to divorce and obtain a religious annulment. If you have questions concerning a civil annulment, contact us or an experienced annulment lawyer near you.