Archive: 2007

On December 4, 2007, the District I Court of Appeals issued their opinion in Wright v. Wright. The decision, ordering the trial court to consider income from all sources in determining the maintenance calculation.

The following series of articles, which originally ran in Wisconsin Law Journal, discusses the court’s holding in Wright v. Wright and its possible ramifications on property division and spousal maintenance.

This is the second of two articles discussing the recent state Supreme Court opinion in Frisch v. Henrichs, 2007 WI 102, which reversed the published decision of the District II Court of Appeals concerning the remedial contempt powers of the circuit courts.

May a circuit court use its remedial contempt powers to craft a remedy, where a party fails to provide tax returns and income information in a timely manner as required under statute, a divorce judgement, and a court order, but then the party produces the information just before the contempt hearing? The Wisconsin Supreme Court says “Yes.”

What would the role of a child’s representative be in a perfect world?

Much ink has been spilled over the GAL’s role, and much real and virtual debate has taken place. This article offers a discussion on the roles of lawyers for children other than the role prescribed in Wisconsin.

Usually, a lawyer represents a client. In Wisconsin, on the other hand, a GAL represents the “concept” of the best interests of the child.

Although the role of a guardian ad litem, or GAL, is settled in Wisconsin, the issue is highly contentious elsewhere. The dispute illustrates that, while the GAL role in Wisconsin is not perfect, it is better than most other alternatives.

This series of articles, written by Atty. Gregg Herman and published in the Wisconsin Law Journal, examines the role of the lawyers for children in family law cases.

The specter of never-ending litigation is a frightening one in any area of law. Where children are involved, it is even scarier.