I was forced to represent myself in a trial in New York Supreme Court, matrimony part. The experience led to the complete loss of all my property and uter financial ruin. Now as I pick up the pieces I hope to be an advocate for real change in NY divorce laws. As pro se one of the first questions that I asked during my divorce debacle was about the relevancy of the US Constitution to my divorce proceeding. The <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fifth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution">fifth</a> and <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourteenth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution">fourteenth</a> amendments of the constitution prevents individuals from being deprived of life, liberty, or property without "due process of law." Due process extends to all persons. Then we have the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution">first amendment</a> that guarantees freedom of religion and freedom of expression.
So given these facts…. (not all these things happened to me, btw)
How is it that New York matrimony courts enforce kosher dietary laws and other religious observations?
How can it be that a court can rule that religious practices must be upheld?
How can our government force a parent to represent themselves in a custody trial against a team of well-financed lawyers? (Of course the parent who was forced to represent themselves lost complete access to the their children).
How can litigants who can’t afford representation at $350 an hour be FORCED to trial by the court and then lose ALL of their property against a well-financed legal team?
Why are petty criminals offered court assistance when they are defending minor punishments while the rich-poor are left to fend for themselves as they face the loss of their children and all property in New York matrimony courts?
How can a court make a ruling on assets without having any idea of what assets actually exist as they do regularly in New York matrimony courts?
How can a judge allow a seasoned divorce attorney to abuse the legal system, lie during trial and violate major ethical standards of conduct against a pro se litigant slapped with a preclusion order?
As an ordinary citizen of New York who has lost all property to the court, without affordable recourse, I am shocked that New York divorce outcomes have not been challenged by the ACLU or other civil liberties protection groups. It is easy to find cases such as I mention, however, they primarily exist in upper-middle-class communities because the Supreme Court of NY matrimony part is off-limits to the poor. If you can’t pay the cost of attorney retainer, typically $10-15,000 in the metro NYC area, then you are forced to duke it yourselves, and many do, and end up in family court or in the ultra-shady fixed price divorce industry. The other option for the poor is to try to proceed pro se, but this is guaranteed failure simply because of an unchecked, corrupt court system that favors insiders over justice. No matter how good of a job you may do as pro se you can’t win in a court that does not follow due process and denies your rights to attorney solely based on your economic status.
Many rulings of custody and property division issued in New York matrimony courts defy any sense of logic in relation to the US Constitution, especially in regard to the concept of Substantive Due Process as defined in the 14th amendment. However, we, the citizens of New York blindly accept this situation. We allow our politicians to ignore rampant violations of our civil liberties and we spend hundreds of millions of dollars a year funding a corrupt court that carries out these injustices. We argue about meaningless fault statutes without fixing the problem of a rampant divorce industry that is in desperate need of regulation and outside oversight.
One major catalyst to change this state of affairs can be to challenge the constitutionality of the practices of the Supreme Court of New York matrimony part as related to the first and fifth and fourteenth amendments of the US Constitution, certainly with regard to Substantive Due Process. Look at cases where children were barred from seeing or speaking to a parent and the parent was pro se. Look at cases where litigants lose greater than 100% of their assets and were pro se. There are thousands of cases to choose from.
How can it be justified under the US constitution that a court rips children from parents who can’t afford legal representation as happens frequently in New York divorces?
How can it be justified under the US constitution that a court can deprive you of all o your property without legal representation and due process of discovery?
How can it be justified that divorce attorneys can bill beyond the assets of a party? Is it really that hard to divide custody time and property? Most States have ended this ludicrous practice long ago and decide on cold fact or simple arithmetic. As New York debates even more complicated methods for computing maintenance in the divorce reform act of 2010 it is clear that the only driver for increased complexity is the divorce industry. Certainly a more complicated formula for spousal maintenance, that is not even mandated into law but recommended, is not going to help anything. The New York State legislature is paralyzed by the divorce industry and the end result of citizens is no longer tolerable.
While attorneys have babbling, apologetic answers for these outcomes, no one is questioning the basic common sense of the end-result decisions. We can debate process until time ends but the utter obscene outcomes that the NY Supreme Court Matrimony Part inflicts on its citizens defies common sense. This is a specific goal of the concept of substantive due process and hopefully one day an actual lawyer with money will work on behalf of the citizens of New York to instill some real change.
I have posed these questions to lawyers and I can say that it is so outside of the box for most of them that they are mostly speechless or rambling. Few, and certainly not I, understand constitutional law and to the best of my knowledge the constitutionality of New York divorce court outcomes has not been challenged in federal courts. Few can afford this and most of us want to move on and pick up the pieces after the courts deprived us everything, however, I hope that in my rants the Internet will bring a person who could possibly make such a fight happen.
Leave Your Comments