New York Divorce and Family Law, the definitive site about divorce, child support and custody.
First time visitors to this site should know that it is arranged so that you must scroll down to view the contents of each page. To easily find a specific topic use either or both of the Two Different Search Bars, as well as the Site Map. If you have a small screen and do not see the entire page, set "Styles" in your browser to "No Style" and set "Text Size" to "medium".
Domestic litigation is a part of American life. Almost everyone has been directly or indirectly involved in divorce, custody, or domestic violence proceedings. This site has been designed to make the lawyer and the non-lawyer more knowledgeable about New York Divorce and Family law, and less vulnerable to misinformation.
Joel R. Brandes
New York Divorce and Family Law™is owned and published by Joel R. Brandes Consulting Services, Inc.
Joel R. Brandes Consulting Services, Inc. is a Florida Corporation. We are located at 2881 NE 33rd Court, Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33306 and at 155 Washington Street, Jersey City, New Jersey 07302.
Joel R. Brandes, the President of Joel R. Brandes Consulting Services, Inc. is the author of "Law and the Family New York 2d" (9 volumes) (West), and "Law and the Family New York Forms"(4 volumes) (West). These sets can be purchased directly from West at 1-800-544-3008. For more information, click on the links below the volumes pictured below to go to West.
Description: This set is both a treatise and a procedural guide. The usual family law issues are covered such as Formation of the Family Unit, Divorce, Judicial Separation, and Annulments. It presents such vital practical considerations as counsel fees to prosecute or defend an appeal. The text analyzes statutes, discusses cases, and includes authors' notes which present hints, practice pointers, and pitfalls to avoid. It also features a complete discussion of appellate practice and offers step-by-step guidance on how to handle an appeal in each of the state's judicial departments. Research aids annotate the text.
Description. This set provides you with practitioner-tested forms for a wide variety of family law matters. It includes forms relating to the creation of the marriage relationship, the attorney-client relationship, matrimonial agreements, and matrimonial litigation. Specific topics covered include antenuptial agreements, separation agreements, modification agreements, and matters relating to infants and incompetents, and service of process.
Joel R. Brandes Consulting Services, Inc. is not a law firm and does not give legal advice. We only work for attorneys. Attorneys can contact us by email for a Free Consultation or by telephone 201-434-6614 or 954-564-9883. More about our services.
New York Divorce and Family Law™ is presented as a public service by Joel R. Brandes Consulting Services, Inc., the ultimate source for litigation support and paralegal services for matrimonial and family law attorneys throughout the United States.
Notice: The information on this site pertains to New York law and is offered as a public service. It is not intended to give legal advice about a specific legal problem. Due to the importance of the individual facts of every case, the information on this site may not necessarily be applicable to any particular case. Changes in the law could at any time make parts of this web site obsolete. The information on this web site was not necessarily written by persons licensed to practice law in a particular jurisdiction. The publisher is not engaged in rendering legal advice and this publication is not intended to give legal advice about a specific legal problem, nor is it a substitute for the advice of an attorney. This information is provided with the understanding that if legal advice is required the services of a competent attorney should be sought.
The New York Divorce and Family Law ™ Agreement Creator, quickly drafts a professional agreement for you in no time. It contains an on-screen manual, written by Joel R. Brandes, entitled "Drafting Agreements for the New York Divorce and Family Law Attorney". The manual describes in detail each provision of the separation agreement, stipulation of settlement, "opting-out" agreement or post-nuptial agreement you are composing. The manual offers you practical advice for drafting your agreement, with "Settlement Considerations", "Drafters Notes" and "Law You Should Know". The Agreement Creator creates professional, high quality agreements ready for filing, and is updated annually so that you will always be up to date on New York law of Agreements. It is easy to use and is designed with a pictorial guide. The opening page contains all the instructions you need to run the program. The pages that follow give you simple, easy to understand choices to make, based upon the provisions of the New York Equitable Distribution Law, Domestic Relations Law § 236 [B] [4]), so there is nothing to learn.
System Requirements: The New York Divorce and Family Law™ Agreement Creator requires a computer with at least 1 gigabyte of memory, with the Microsoft Windows Operating System, running the Microsoft® Word Program (MS Word).
The New York Divorce and Family Law ™ Agreement Creator costs $549.00.
Each additional license costs $ 199.00.
The New York Divorce and Family Law™ Child Support Calculator, which contains an on-screen Guide to the Child Support Standards Act, written by Joel R. Brandes, automatically generates a helpful summary report, calculates the child support amount on combined parental income, over $130,000, and drafts for you the language required to be included in agreements, stipulations, and findings of fact. Another feature, useful for purposes of negotiating a settlement, is the ability to do "what if" calculations using a different "combined parental income".
System Requirements: New York Divorce and Family Law™ Child Support Calculator requires a computer with at least 1 gigabyte of memory, with the Microsoft Windows Operating System, running the Microsoft® Word Program (MS Word).
The New York Divorce and Family Law™Child Support Calculator costs $199.00.
Each additonal license beyond three licenses costs $99.00.
The New York and Family Law™ Marital Property Distributor, which contains an on-screen Guide to the Equitable Distribution Law, written by Joel R. Brandes, calculates, on a "what if" basis, the total value of each spouses' share of the marital assets. This program allows the user to re-distribute marital property to any percentage, and has the unique "auto-balancer" function which automatically distributes a selected asset between the parties to create a total 50-50 asset balance. There is no need for a calculator when you use this program.
System Requirements: The New York Divorce and Family Law™ Marital Property Distributor requires a computer with at least 1 gigabyte of memory, with the Microsoft Windows Operating System, running the Microsoft® Word Program (MS Word).
The New York and Family Law™ Marital Property Distributor costs $99.00.
The programs are easy to run and come with pictorial guides, rather than confusing instructions. The contents of all of the programs have been designed by us to meet the demanding needs of the busy practitioner, based upon years of experience in New York divorce and family law practice.
NEW!!
The New York Divorce and Family Law™ Temporary Maintenance Calculator, contains an on-screen "Guide to the Temporary Maintenance Guidelines" written by Joel R. Brandes. It automatically generates a detailed report showing each step of the temporary maintenance calculation required by the new law. As you enter the parties incomes into the program, the " income entry" screen calculates the "presumptive amount" of temporary maintenance, so that you can try a range of scenarios and immediately see the outcome.
System Requirements: New York Divorce and Family Law™ Child Support Calculator requires a computer with at least 1 gigabyte of memory, with the Microsoft Windows Operating System, running the Microsoft® Word Program (MS Word).
The New York Divorce and Family Law™ Temporary Maintenance Calculator costs $199.00. Each additional license after three licenses costs $99.00.
Attorneys and Judges may Subscribe to Bits and Bytes™ , our free electronic newsletter published for attorneys and judges, as a public service, which reports on important new decisions and laws before they appear on our website. Our electronic newsletter will be sent to you by email twice a month, to keep you up to date on important developments in New York Divorce and Family Law. To subscribe click on this link to fill out a subscription form or send an email containing your name, office address, telephone number and email address to subscribe@nysdivorce.com. Your information will be kept confidential in accordance with our privacy policy.
Click to Visit New York Divorce and Family Law Blog - Our blog supplements the "Cases of the Week" and "News" Pages of our web site. We report important New York Divorce and Family Law decisions which are reported on our web site, as well as cases which are important, but due to size limitations, are not reported on our web site. Where appropriate, our postings contain editorial comment.
"Rules of Professional Conduct for Family Law Attorneys," written by Joel R. Brandes, discusses the rules that particularly effect New York Matrimonial and Family law attorneys. (Click here to download the Article )
We suggest you use our Search Bar at the top of each page to obtain a list of every document on this site related to your search, or you can try the New York Divorce and Family Law Google Search bar below to make your search easier.
Click to Visit New York Divorce and Family Law Blog - Our blog supplements the "Cases of the Week and News Page" of our web site. We report important New York Divorce and Family Law decisions which are reported on our web site, as well as cases which are important, but due to size limitations, are not reported on our web site. Where appropriate, our postings contain editorial comment.
Laws of 2010, Ch 384, effective October 12, 2010, amended Domestic Relations Law § 170 to add subdivision 7. It adopts the "irretrievably broken" no-fault divorce ground for New York. However, a divorce may not be granted until all of the major ancillary issues are resolved by the parties or the court.
Laws of 2010, Ch 371, effective October 12, 2010, amends Domestic Relations Law § 236 [B][6] to add a subdivision 5-a. It revises the process for setting awards of temporary maintenance during the pendency of a matrimonial action, by creating a formula and list of factors that presumptively govern such awards. It amends Domestic Relations Law § 236 [B][1][a] to update the definition of "maintenance" by cross-referencing it to Domestic Relations Law § 236 [B] [6] subdivision 5-a and amends Domestic Relations Law § 236 [B][6] to add 5 new factors for the court to consider in determining the amount and duration of "post-divorce "maintenance.
Laws of 2010, Ch 329, as amended by Laws of 2010, Ch 415, effective October 12, 2010 amended Domestic Relations Law §§ 237 and 238 to create a rebuttable presumption that counsel fees shall be awarded to the less monied spouse. It adds actions to obtain maintenance or distribution of property after a foreign judgment of divorce to the actions for which such fees shall be awarded. In exercising the court's discretion, the court is required to seek to assure that each party is adequately represented and that where fees and expenses are to be awarded, they shall be awarded on a timely basis pendente lite, so as to enable adequate representation from the commencement of the proceeding. In addition the court is authorized to order expert fees to be paid by one party to the other to enable the party to carry on or defend the action. The parties and their attorneys are also required to submit an affidavit to the court with financial information to enable the court to make its determination. The monied spouse is now required to disclose how much he has agreed to pay and how much he has paid his attorney. The affidavit must include the amount of any retainer, the amounts paid and still owing thereunder, the hourly amount charged by the attorney, the amounts paid, or to be paid, any experts, and any additional costs, disbursements or expenses. In addition, Domestic Relations Law § 238 was also amended to add to the actions for which such fees shall be awarded "actions to enforce a court order".
NEW!!
The New York Divorce and Family Law™ Temporary Maintenance Calculator, contains an on-screen "Guide to the Temporary Maintenance Guidelines" written by Joel R. Brandes. It automatically generates a detailed report showing each step of the temporary maintenance calculation required by the new law. As you enter the parties incomes into the program, the " income entry" screen calculates the "presumptive amount" of temporary maintenance, so that you can try a range of scenarios and immediately see the outcome.
System Requirements: New York Divorce and Family Law™ Child Support Calculator requires a computer with at least 1 gigabyte of memory, with the Microsoft Windows Operating System, running the Microsoft® Word Program (MS Word).
The New York Divorce and Family Law™ Temporary Maintenance Calculator costs $199.00. Each additional license after three licenses costs $99.00.
Court of Appeals Holds that the Initial Determination of Whether a Particular Asset Is Marital or Separate Property Is a Question of Law, Subject to Plenary Review on Appeal, and DRL 236 Creates a Presumption That All Property, Unless Clearly Separate, Is Deemed Marital Property' and the Burden Rests with the Titled Spouse to Rebut That Presumption.
In Fields v Fields, __NY3d ___, 6/11/2010 NYLJ 36, (col. 3) the Court of Appeals, in an opinion by Judge Graffeo, observed that, although the manner in which marital property is distributed falls within the discretion of the trial court, 'the initial determination of whether a particular asset is marital or separate property is a question of law, subject to plenary review on appeal' (DeJesus v. DeJesus, 90 NY2d 643, 647 [1997])." Here, the Court concluded that the value of the husband's one-half interest in the parties' residence, a Manhattan townhouse that the husband purchased during the marriage and where the parties had lived for nearly thirty years, was marital property and affirmed the order of the Appellate Division. (Click here for complete discussion )
First Department Holds Prenuptial Agreement May Contain Enforceable Waiver of Interest in Retirement Assets.
In Strong v Dubin,--- N.Y.S.2d ----, 2010 WL 1905004 (N.Y.A.D. 1 Dept.) the First Department found, in an opinion by Justice Andrias, that the parties' prenuptial agreement contained an enforceable waiver of defendant wife's interest in the marital portion of plaintiff husband's retirement assets. In analyzing this issue it revisited its determination in Richards v. Richards (232 AD2d 303, 303 [1996]), where the court had found that under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act 'only a spouse can waive spousal rights to employee plan benefits, that a fiancee is not a spouse, and that such rights, therefore, cannot be effectively waived in a prenuptial agreement.' Justice Andrias wrote that insofar as the Court's determination in Richards v. Richards (232 AD2d 303 [1996]) would preclude the waiver of pension rights in the event of divorce in a prenuptial agreement, it should not be followed in that it failed to recognize the distinction between waivers of survivor benefits and other pension benefits. For purposes of equitable distribution, a waiver of any interest in a pension as marital property by an otherwise valid prenuptial agreement is not prohibited by The Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA) (29 USC 1001 et seq. ), as amended by the Retirement Equity Act of 1984 (REA) (citing Moor-Jankowski, 222 AD2d at 423; Edmonds v. Edmonds, 184 Misc 2d 928 [Sup Ct, Onondaga County 2000]).
Second Department Disapproves of Requirement of Showing Existence of "Special Circumstances" Warranting Discovery from a Nonparty in Order to Successfully Oppose a Motion to Quash a Subpoena Duces Tecum Served on That Nonparty
In Kooper v Kooper, --- N.Y.S.2d ----, 2010 WL 1912142 (N.Y.A.D. 2 Dept.) the appeal considered the principles governing the discovery of documents from nonparties pursuant to CPLR 3101(a)(4). It provides that the party seeking disclosure must give notice stating "the circumstances or reasons such disclosure is sought or required" from the nonparty. The question before the court was whether a party must establish the existence of "special circumstances" warranting discovery from a nonparty in order to successfully oppose a motion to quash a subpoena duces tecum served on that nonparty? Justice Angiolillo, in the opinion for the court, noted that many of the cases of the Second Department continued to apply that standard after CPLR 3101(a)(4) was amended to remove the requirement that discovery from a nonparty be obtained only "where the court on motion determines that there are adequate special circumstances." and concluded: “We hereby disapprove the further application of the "special circumstances" standard in this context.” (Click here for complete discussion)
Court of Appeals Reaffirms Alison D, and Rejects Parenthood by Equitable Estoppel But Recognizes Partner As Parent By Giving Full Faith and Credit to Vermont Civil Union
In Debra H v Janice R, ___NY3d___, 2010 WL 1752168 (N.Y.) the Court of Appeals reaffirmed it holding in Alison D v. Virginia M. (77 N.Y.2d 651 [1991] ), that only a child's biological or adoptive parent has standing to seek visitation against the wishes of a fit custodial parent. It rejected the argument that Matter of Shondel J. v. Mark D. (7 N.Y.3d 320 [2006] ) endorsed a nonbiological or nonadoptive parent's right to invoke equitable estoppel to secure visitation or custody notwithstanding Alison D and held that Alison D., in conjunction with second-parent adoption, creates a bright-line rule that promotes certainty in the wake of domestic breakups. However, because Debra H. and Janice R. entered into a civil union in Vermont before M.R.'s birth, it reversed the Appellate Division's for reasons of comity, holding that Debra H. was M.R.'s parent under Vermont law and, as a matter of comity she was his parent under New York law as well, thereby conferring standing for her to seek visitation and custody in a best-interest hearing. The Court limited its ruling, which did not resolve whether New York extends comity to the civil union for other purposes. It decided only that New York will recognize parentage created by a civil union in Vermont. (Click here for complete discussion)
Court of Appeals Holds Equitable Estoppel May Be Used by Biological Father to Prevent Child's Mother from Asserting Biological Paternity, When Mother Has Acquiesced in the Development of a Close Relationship Between the Child and Another Father Figure, and it Would Be Detrimental to the Child's Interests to Disrupt That Relationship.
In Matter of Juanita A, v Kenneth Mark N., ___NY3d___, 2010 WL 1752194 (N.Y.) the Court of Appeals, in an opinion by Judge Pigott, held that under the circumstances of this case, where another father-figure is present in the child's life, a biological father may assert an equitable estoppel defense in paternity and child support proceedings. The doctrine of equitable estoppel may be used by a purported biological father to prevent a child's mother from asserting biological paternity, when the mother has acquiesced in the development of a close relationship between the child and another father figure, and it would be detrimental to the child's interests to disrupt that relationship. (Click here for complete discussion)
Court of Appeals Holds Family Court Has Subject Matter Jurisdiction to Adjudicate Support Petition Brought Pursuant to "UIFSA" by Biological Parent Seeking Child Support from Former Same-sex Partner.
In the Matter of H.M. v. E.T. ___NY3d___, 48 opn 10 (2010) the Court of Appeals, in an opinion by Judge Ciparek, held that the Family Court has subject matter jurisdiction to adjudicate a support petition brought pursuant to the Uniform Interstate Family Support Act ("UIFSA") (Family Ct Act art 5-B) by a biological parent seeking child support from her former same-sex partner. The Court concluded that because H.M. asserted that E.T. was the child's parent, and was chargeable with the child's support, the case was within the Family Court's Article 4 jurisdiction. It did not decide whether it was also, as the Support Magistrate and the Appellate Division dissent concluded, within that Court's Article 5 jurisdiction. Nor did it decide the merits of H.M.'s support claim. (Click here for complete discussion)
Court of Appeals Holds Egregious Misconduct Must Be an Exceptional Situation, Due to Outrageous or Conscience-shocking Conduct. Absent Those Circumstances, Liberal Discovery on Issues of Marital Fault, Should Not Ordinarily Be Permitted.
In Howard S v Lillian S, ___NY3d ___, No. 71 (2010) the Court of Appeals held that, at a minimum, in order to have any significance at all, egregious conduct must consist of behavior that falls well outside the bounds of the basis for an ordinary divorce action. This is not to say that there can never be a situation where grounds for divorce and egregious conduct will overlap. However, it should be only a truly exceptional situation, due to outrageous or conscience-shocking conduct on the part of one spouse, that will require the court to consider whether to adjust the equitable distribution of the assets. The Court cited, as examples, a case involving the attempted bribery of the trial judge and a case involving a vicious assault of spouse in presence of the children. Absent these types of extreme circumstances, courts are not in the business of regulating how spouses treat one another. In a footnote the Court pointed out that to the extent that the Appellate Division opinion can be read to limit egregious conduct to behavior involving extreme violence, the definition should not be so restrictive. The majority opinion appears to have adopted the rule of the First and Second Departments that a party is not entitled to discovery on the issue of fault. (Click here for complete discussion)
Laws of 2010, Ch. 32 amended the automatic restraints provisions of Domestic Relations Law, Section 236 [B][2][b][2], to exempt from the automatic restraints imposed by that section upon the commencement of a matrimonial action, payments made to a party who is already in pay status at the time that the action is commenced. Subdivision (2) now provides as follows: (2) Neither party shall transfer, encumber, assign, remove, withdraw or in any way dispose of any tax deferred funds, stocks or other assets held in any individual retirement accounts, 401K accounts, profit sharing plans, Keogh accounts, or any other pension or retirement account, and the parties shall further refrain from applying for or requesting the payment of retirement benefits or annuity payments of any kind, without the consent of the other party in writing, or upon further order of the court; except that any party who is already in pay status may continue to receive such payments thereunder.
22 NYCRR 202.5(d)(1) Specifies Limited Circumstances under Which Court Clerks Can Reject Papers.
Section 202.5(d)(1) was added to the Uniform Civil Rules for Supreme and County Courts to specify the limited circumstances under which court clerks can reject papers. They may reject papers that do not have an index number, documents commencing or concluding a lawsuit that do not list the names of all parties, filings offered in the wrong county, or documents not signed as required by court rules authorizing sanctions for frivolous contentions. 22 NYCRR 202.5(d)(1) also requires clerks to date-stamp papers they reject and to write the reason for the rejection on the papers themselves. In addition, the rule tracks the provisions of CPLR 2102(c). CPLR 2102(c) which was added effective January 1, 2008 (See Laws of 2007, Ch 125, §4), provides that a clerk shall not refuse to accept for filing any paper presented for that purpose except where specifically directed to do so by statute or rules promulgated by the chief administrator of the courts, or order of the court. The 2008 amendment to CPLR 2102(c) was intended to make it clear that the clerk of the court is not authorized to make a determination as to the legal sufficiency of any legal filings, and that such a determination was the province of the court, rather than the clerk.
CSSA Cap on Combined Parental Income Raised to $130,000 effective January 31, 2010
Laws of 2009, Chapter 343 enacted the "child support modernization act" which amended the provisions of the Child Support Standards Act to raise the cap on combined parental income to $130,000 effective January 31, 2010, and to provide for the adjustment of the $130,000 cap every two years to reflect changes in the Consumer Price Index. The child support percentages of payments that non-custodial parents are obligated to make toward child support remains the same. Domestic Relations Law 240 (1-b) (2) and Family Court Act 413 (1) (c) (2) were each amended to provide that the court shall multiply the combined parental income up to the amount set forth in Social Services Law 111-i, (2) (b). Social Services Law 111-i (2)(b) provides that the combined parental income amount to be reported in the child support standards chart and utilized in calculating orders of child support in accordance with Domestic Relations Law 240 (1-b) (2) and Family Court Act 413 (1) (c) (2) shall be one hundred thirty thousand dollars; and that beginning January 31, 2012 and every two years thereafter, the combined parental income amount shall increase by the product of the average annual percentage changes in the consumer price index for all urban consumers (CPI-U) as published by the United States department of labor bureau of labor statistics for the two year period rounded to the nearest one thousand dollars. These amendments take effect on January 31, 2010.
Click to Visit New York Divorce and Family Law Blog - Our blog supplements the "Cases of the Week and News Page" of our web site. We report important New York Divorce and Family Law decisions which are reported on our web site, as well as cases which are important, but due to size limitations, are not reported on our web site. Where appropriate, our postings contain editorial comment.
Our site contains the most comprehensive and complete information available about Federal Court decisions construing The Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction and the International Child Abduction Remedies Act.
New and Recent Hague Convention International Child Abduction Cases
Falk v Sinclair, 692 F.Supp.2d 147 (D. Maine., 2010) [Germany] [One year Statute of Limitations] [Wishes of the Child]
Haimdas v Haimdas, --- F.Supp.2d ----, 2010 WL 2342377 (E.D.N.Y.) [England] [Rights of Custody] [Wishes of The Child]
Haimdas v Haimdas, 2010 WL 652823 (E.D.N.Y.)) [England] [Expert Opinions]
Foster v Foster, 654 F. Supp 2d 348 (W. D. Pennsylvania, 2009) [Canada] [Grave Risk of Harm]Neves v Neves, 637 F. Supp 2d 322 (W.D. North Carolina, 2009) [Germany] [Grave Risk of Harm] [Attorneys Fees]
Fridlund v Spychaj-Fridlund, 654 F. Supp 2d 634, ( E.D. Kentucky, 2009) [Sweden] [Federal and State Judicial Remedies]
A "Protocol for Emergency Applications", designed to facilitate applications for Emergency Applications outside of regular court hours in the evening and on weekends and holidays when the courthouse is closed, was issued by the Chief Administrative judge. It establishes the central phone number and e-mail address listed above for attorneys to use in the event of an emergency. According to the protocol, staff members from the Division of Technology will pass on the requests to the administrative judge or a designated back-up, who will arrange to have a judge hear the application.
The New York Court of Appeals and the Appellate Divisions all have their own websites. All of the Court sites can be accessed from this web site
Experts are people who know a great deal about very little and who go along learning more and more abut less and less until they know practically everything about nothing. Lawyers, on the other hand are people who know very little about many things and keep learning less and less about more and more until they know practically nothing about everything.
Judges are people who start out knowing everything about everything but end up knowing nothing about everything because of their constant association with experts and lawyers.
Click to Visit New York Divorce and Family Law Blog - Our blog supplements the "Cases of the Week and News Page" of our web site. We report important New York Divorce and Family Law decisions which are reported on our web site, as well as cases which are important, but due to size limitations, are not reported on our web site. Where appropriate, our postings contain editorial comment.
Notice: The information on this site pertains to New York law and is offered as a public service. It is not intended to give legal advice about a specific legal problem. Due to the importance of the individual facts of every case, the information on this site may not necessarily be applicable to any particular case. Changes in the law could at any time make parts of this web site obsolete. The information on this web site was not necessarily written by persons licensed to practice law in a particular jurisdiction. The publisher is not engaged in rendering legal advice and this publication is not intended to give legal advice about a specific legal problem, nor is it a substitute for the advice of an attorney. This information is provided with the understanding that if legal advice is required the services of a competent attorney should be sought.
Our web site has many links to web sites of other organizations, including, but not limited to court systems, publishers of legal information, agencies, educational institutions, profit making companies and non-profit associations. While we offer these electronic links for your convenience in accessing New York Divorce and Family Law related information, please be aware that when you exit our web site, the privacy policy stated on our web site may not be the same as that on other web sites. In addition, we cannot attest to the accuracy of the information provided by linked sites. Linking to a web site does not constitute an endorsement by us of the information presented on the linked site or the products that may be sold on the linked site.
Potential clients of any law firm listed on this site are advised to read the Statement of Clients Rights and Responsibilities, which New York matrimonial attorneys are required to provide to them at the initial consultation.
(This web site may be considered Attorney Advertising by New York Court rules)
The New York Divorce and Family Law ™ Agreement Creator, quickly drafts a professional agreement for you in no time. It contains an on-screen manual, written by Joel R. Brandes, entitled "Drafting Agreements for the New York Divorce and Family Law Attorney". The manual describes in detail each provision of the separation agreement, stipulation of settlement, "opting-out" agreement or post-nuptial agreement you are composing. The manual offers you practical advice for drafting your agreement, with "Settlement Considerations", "Drafters Notes" and "Law You Should Know". The Agreement Creator creates professional, high quality agreements ready for filing, and is updated annually so that you will always be up to date on New York law of Agreements. It is easy to use and is designed with a pictorial guide. The opening page contains all the instructions you need to run the program. The pages that follow give you simple, easy to understand choices to make, based upon the provisions of the New York Equitable Distribution Law, Domestic Relations Law § 236 [B] [4]), so there is nothing to learn. 
