|
Russell I. Marnell, P.C. |
Long Island Divorce Attorney |
Long Island Custody Lawyer |
New York Family Law Attorney |
Please direct all inquiries to East Meadow Office | |||
|
Law Offices of |
The Financial Center at Mitchel Field | Suffolk County Address: | |
| |||
Long Island Divorce, Custody, and Family Law Attorneys |
||
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
Areas of Practice |
About the Firm |
Law & Statutes |
Frequently Asked Questions |
News & Media |
Contact |
Related Links |
Family Law Question of the WeekWednesday, March 10 Question: Send your question via e-mail. We will respect your privacy.
Firm Overview
Click on the links below to see an overview of our law firm. Macromedia Shockwave is needed.
Part 1 (2.3 mb)
|
The attorneys of Russell I. Marnell, P.C. concentrate their practice in divorce, custody, and all areas of family law throughout the Long Island and New York metro areas. We are a top-rated "AV" firm, consisting of four lawyers providing exceptional client representation for more than 20 years. Founded in 1985, the Law Offices of Russell I. Marnell, P.C. has sought to provide excellent attorney representation in divorce and custody law to residents on Long Island, including Nassau County and Suffolk County, and all areas of New York City, at reasonable cost. Many of the divorce matters handled by our attorneys include complex issues concerning self-employed business owners and professionals, individuals having substantial net worth or who are exceptional wage earners. Our four lawyer firm represents clients in and around Nassau County and Suffolk County, and New York City who have issues concerning: • divorce Click here to view attorney Russell I. Marnell's resume
Should You File for Divorce Now or Later?With the uncertain economic climate, many people who want a divorce may be wondering if now might be the right time. The answer may be YES: • If you are a business owner whose spouse may be entitled to an equitable share of the value of your business, now may be the right time to have the business valued. A business is typically valued at the commencement of a divorce action. • If you own a home or other real estate with your spouse acquired during the marriage, and wish to buy out your spouse's interest, now may be a good time to have the house valued for that purpose. The value of these assets may be lower today than after the economy recovers. These questions can be more fully answered during an initial consultation with one of our lawyers. If you would like more information, please contact us for an appointment.
Same-Sex Support IssueIn a recent case, entitled H.M. v. E.T., 2007-09323, a New York State Appellate Division, Second Department panel decided that New York State Family Court cannot require a woman to pay child support to her former same-sex partner. BackgroundA same-sex couple in New York, neither married nor entered into a civil union, decided to conceive a child, via artificial insemination, that was born in1994. Shortly thereafter, the relationship ended. In 2007, a Family Court ordered a hearing to determine if a former partner has the prerogative to deny her responsibility to financially support the child. Conclusion In a 3-2 ruling, the panel overturned the Family Court’s order, as it concluded a woman with no biological or legal ties to a child, cannot be ordered to pay child support. The panel found that Family Court Act article 5 only addressed issues involving the male fatherhood of a child and can therefore not be applied as a woman cannot be considered the “father” of a child.
April 2008Child Support RulingIn a recent case, The New York State Court of Appeals ruled that a child support Order issued in another state cannot be modified in New York. BackgroundA couple in Connecticut obtained a judgment of divorce that included provisions for the support of the couples’ three children. In Connecticut the age of majority is 18, i.e. child support would end for a child at the age of 18. Subsequent to the divorce, the mother moved to New York with the three children. When her oldest child turned 18 and child support ended, she petitioned the New York court for a new order of support and was awarded additional child support by a lower court. ConclusionThe Court of Appeals reversed the decision, determining that not only had the Order issued in Connecticut been fulfilled and therefore could not be modified, but also that the New York courts had no jurisdiction in the matter.
Child Custody Case StudyThe Law Office of Russell I. Marnell successfully won a case on an appeal, upholding a trial court determination,awarding sole custody of the parties' children to the father. The Court found that this was in the best interest of the children and that the father was the parent more likely to ensure contact between the children and the non-custodial parent.
Matrimonial Case StudyIn a matrimonial case in Suffolk County, Russell I. Marnell and Scott R. Schwartz successfully obtained an award of counsel fees from the Court on behalf of their client. In making such an award, The matrimonial Judge stated that "the Defendant’s attorneys, Russell I. Marnell and Scott R. Schwartz, Esqs., are well known to this Court as honorable and accomplished matrimonial attorneys. In this matter, they represented the Defendant with skill and professionalism."
Divorce Case StudyThe Law Offices of Russell I. Marnell received a favorable decision following a trial in the Nassau County Supreme Court. The case was handled by both Mr. Marnell and Mr. Schwartz and was tried by Mr. Marnell. The case concerned a woman who had become a doctor in her native country of India prior to the marriage. The parties got married in India and subsequently moved to the United States. In order to become licensed to practice medicine in the United States, the Wife was required to pass a licensing examination which she ultimately did. The Husband who was also a practicing physician in India never passed the required licensing examinations and thus was not able to practice medicine in the United States. As a result, the Wife earned significantly more income as compared with the Husband. The parties owned a house and had one child. During the trial, it was established that the Husband provided little or no assistance to the Wife while she was studying for her medical examination in the United States. It was also proven that the wife worked while she was studying to pass these examinations while the husband had minimal income throughout this time period. It was further established that the Husband secreted $35,000.00 of the parties’ marital assets during the marriage. After the trial, the Court issued a decision determining the following: 1. The Husband was obligated to pay child support to the Wife (the parties had agreed that the wife would have custody).
Lawyer RemovedIn a recent case, entitled Matter of Mark T. V. Joyanna U., 54630, an Appellate Division, Third Department panel decided to remove an attorney as counsel to an 11-year-old child. Background According to statutes, legal principles, and precedents, law guardians must provide meaningful assistance to their clients (whether they are adults or children) to communicate their positions. The law guardian for the child in this matter did not know his client’s position as he represented him in a paternity and visitation case. The attorney acknowledged that he neither met nor spoke with the child while representing him. Conclusion In a unanimous decision, the panel removed the assigned attorney from the appeal case, as it concluded that by proceeding on the appeal without consulting and advising his client, the attorney failed to fulfill his essential obligation. The panel further found that, the child was at least, entitled to consult with and be counseled by his assigned attorney, to have the appellate process explained, to have his questions answered. This logic applies as long as the child doesn’t suffer from a medical condition that would hinder his/her ability to make a reasoned decision.
|
|
|
Attorneys and lawyers concentrating in divorce, custody,
paternity, child support, and all other family law
|
