Got interesting call from OC's paralegal

[DecentDad]

Hi Soc,

Recall that biomom is insisting that she will follow what she believes the court said regarding new schedule.

Last week, OC sent me draft orders that are consistent with what I heard in court.  Biomom disagrees with the orders.

Biomom violated them on Monday.  I sent correspondence to OC and GAL about it.

OC's paralegal called me today.  This person has always been OC's right-hand person at hearings, so she seems pretty involved.  She wanted to confirm that their draft orders are what I heard.  I said yeah.

She said that biomom is refusing to accept them.  I said okay, not really my problem, but it unacceptable for her to create a fight in front of the child.  Paralegal agreed.

Paralegal asked if we could talk off the record.  I said sure.  She said if not off the record, she could lose her job.  I said okay.

She said she has several children of her own, that this case keeps her awake at night, how horrible this whole situation has become for my daughter (i.e., how biomom has handled it), that child is suffering because of biomom's rage at me (though paralegal didn't comment on her boss, the attorney obviously has no problem with these latest tactics).

She said that my pending baby (with wife) is really threatening biomom, and she wanted to make sure that I had advised on summer vacation schedule that lets child bond with new baby, because she's concerned biomom won't be supportive of it.

She advised that I should keep minor's counsel apprised of biomom's threats to violate orders, and cc him on everything I send to OC's office.  She advised me to just stay calm with him, focus on big picture, don't get into the minutia of all the problems that biomom has created.

She said that I handle myself "fairly well" in court, that our prior judge was able to manage this case (largely shield child from the constantly litigated issues and demands) because of his decades of experience and years on this case.   She said new judge is just too new to immediately see what's going on.  But she perceives that the new judge may be about to lower the hammer on biomom at our next hearing.

She wants to order a transcript.  I already ordered one (likely won't have it for 2 weeks), and I know that beginning today the court reporter is on vacation for 10 days... so OC can't even order a copy for two weeks.  She feels we're kind of in this situation until transcript says otherwise.

I had already advised OC (via letter earlier this week) that if biomom repeats custodial interference of new orders, I'll file for contempt.  I invited OC to contact me if I'm somehow misinterpreting her drafted orders.  I didn't hear back (except for this call).

I met with the school this week and gave them a copy of the drafted orders (which I signed).  Principal sent me a letter, confirming receipt of the orders and stating intent to enforce the two days per week that I'm to pick up child until they receive updated court orders.

We have a review hearing in 3 weeks.

1.  If we don't have hearing transcript before the next exchange at which there may be conflict (i.e., 10 days from now), and if biomom still states intent to violate orders (i.e., and create tug-of-war of child at school), should I just let it happen (I'll have an audio recorder present)?  Or is it reasonable and strategic to ask for a RO to keep biomom away from school on the two afternoons I'm to pick up child?  Or simply express my serious concern to GAL about the conflict biomom willingly creates in front of child, and let him handle it?

2.  Any need to write OC to document my understanding "on the record" that her client apparently disagrees with both her office and I with regard to the drafted orders?

3.  If transcript shows that biomom is wrong (which it will), how best to play it?

4.  If I gain knowledge "off the record" from someone in OC's office, I don't imagine I can share it with GAL while protecting the identity of the source, right?  Privilege and hearsay issues?

Thanks,
DD

[socrateaser]

>1.  If we don't have hearing transcript before the next
>exchange at which there may be conflict (i.e., 10 days from
>now), and if biomom still states intent to violate orders
>(i.e., and create tug-of-war of child at school), should I
>just let it happen (I'll have an audio recorder present)?  Or
>is it reasonable and strategic to ask for a RO to keep biomom
>away from school on the two afternoons I'm to pick up child?
>Or simply express my serious concern to GAL about the conflict
>biomom willingly creates in front of child, and let him handle
>it?

The paralegal has violated her client's confidence. This is a HUGE ethical violation. She could more than lose her job -- she could never get another legal job again. She is also engaging in the unauthorized practice of law, which is a misdemeanor in CA, so the fact that she disclosed this info to you is flabergasting to me.

It makes me a little suspicious too, but let's say it's all her honest desire to to a moral right via a legal wrong.

If you tell the GAL your source, that's not privileged, and the GAL may tell OC and the paralegal will be in hot water. So, I think it's not worth raising the issue.

You should do what the paralegal advises, and share your concern about the mother's behavior and ask advice. Tell GAL you don't want to seek a TRO because it makes you look hostile, but you don't want the child injured by these exchanges.

You have one of those ex's who doesn't want you but doesn't want anyone else to have you, because it lowers her self esteem. It really sucks.

>
>2.  Any need to write OC to document my understanding "on the
>record" that her client apparently disagrees with both her
>office and I with regard to the drafted orders?

I thought you already did this, but if not, I would share my concern with the GAL that mom has stated her refusal to comply with the current orders and that you would prefer that she not cause a scene in front of the child, but that if she does, that you will be forced to seek a contempt order.

>
>3.  If transcript shows that biomom is wrong (which it will),
>how best to play it?

See above.

>
>4.  If I gain knowledge "off the record" from someone in OC's
>office, I don't imagine I can share it with GAL while
>protecting the identity of the source, right?  Privilege and
>hearsay issues?

It may be privileged, because it wasn't intended to be disclosed and the other party has a reasonable expectation of privacy. But, that doesn't mean you couldn't submit it in a declaration (a bell once rung cannot be unrung). Trouble is that the paralegal will deny the conversation, and you'll look like your inventing to gain an advantage. So, I wouldn't waste my time with it.

[DecentDad]

Gotcha on the one warning...I know enough not to think paralegal is my friend.

I DID send a letter to OC this week saying, "Appears to be some confusion, child was caught in the middle, please let me know if I'm wrong on how to interpret what you sent."

Paralegal's call today was to let me know that her office and I agree on what the judge ordered, and that biomom disagrees with it and won't concede.

So it's a bit weird that I'm being informed (in response to my letter) that biomom and her attorney don't agree with each other.

I was wondering if I needed to document (via correspondence) my understanding of the situation we have now -- where OC and I are in agreement, but OC's client is not.

[socrateaser]

>Gotcha on the one warning...I know enough not to think
>paralegal is my friend.
>
>I DID send a letter to OC this week saying, "Appears to be
>some confusion, child was caught in the middle, please let me
>know if I'm wrong on how to interpret what you sent."
>
>Paralegal's call today was to let me know that her office and
>I agree on what the judge ordered, and that biomom disagrees
>with it and won't concede.
>
>So it's a bit weird that I'm being informed (in response to my
>letter) that biomom and her attorney don't agree with each
>other.
>
>I was wondering if I needed to document (via correspondence)
>my understanding of the situation we have now -- where OC and
>I are in agreement, but OC's client is not.

Yes, write back confirming the call and your mutual understanding that the orders are approved by you as to form. Don't even bother mentioning that the client may not agree. That's between her and her attorney. Your duty is to approve or object -- after that, it's not your problem.

This all assumes that you actually signed the copy that is to go to the judge as approved. If you didn't, then attach a copy that meets your agreed to understanding and sign that as approved. Then that will be what they must file.

[DecentDad]

.

[jilly]

DD I've been following your case and been astounded at the stuff the biomom has done to you.  I wish you luck in this latest fiasco.

I am a paralegal and after reading your conversation with OC's paralegal I am astounded that she would put her reputation and career on the line like that.  There are times I've known the morally right thing to do but I HAVE to do what is legally and ethically (professionwise) right, regardless of my feelings.  Paralegals have their own set of professional conduct rules and she definitely broke them.  I'm with Soc...don't trust her as far as you can throw her.  If she'd have this type of conversation with you, what else might she say?  I am just shaking my head in disbelief!