NJ Legal Beat
Sunday, January 29, 2012
Changes in the Howes & Howes Practice in 2012
Howes & Howes is a small law firm located in the heart of New Jersey. We are in the twentieth year of service to clients in New Jersey. With two experienced lawyers and two top-notch legal assistants, we will continue to provide the same level of service to clients as we have for the past two decades, with some small changes due to the appointment of H&H partner Katherine Howes as Judge of the Bound Brook Municipal Court.
2012 is off to a good start at Howes & Howes. That good start has necessitated some minor changes to our practice.
Howes & Howes will continue to operate the same full-time practice of law at our Raritan office. It will remain fully staffed and open for business a minimum of five days each week. That will not change. What will change is some refinement in our areas of practice as follows:
1. Municipal court: Katherine Howes will no longer represent clients in the municipal courts of New Jersey. She can no longer do so as a result of an appointment that took effect on January 1, 2012.
2. Municipal court: Tim Howes will no longer represent clients in the municipal courts in Somerset County. He will continue to bring his two decades of experience in municipal court practice to the table as he represents clients in the municipal courts of all other New Jersey counties.
3. Juvenile court: Tim Howes will no longer represent clients in the juvenile part in Somerset County. He will continue to bring his 23 years of experience in juvenile part practice to the table as he represents clients in the juvenile part of all other New Jersey counties.
4. Criminal court: Tim Howes will no longer represent clients in the criminal court in Somerset County. He will continue to bring his quarter century of experience in criminal court practice to the table as he represents clients in the criminal courts of all other New Jersey counties.
If you have any questions about our areas of practice you can contact Pamela Vail or Jennifer Starr at the Howes & Howes office.
Monday, January 02, 2012
Congratulations to Judge Howes
On January 1, 2011, Howes & Howes rang in the new year with a big accomplishment. Bound Brook Mayor Carey Pilato nominated H&H partner Katherine Howes to be the Judge of the Bound Brook Municipal Court. The borough council unanimously confirmed her. This is a part-time job. It will not cause any major changes in the practice or operation of Howes & Howes. We will still serve our clients here in New Jersey, just as we have since 1991.
The Borough of Bound Brook has appointed Katherine Howes to a three-year term as its municipal court judge. Ms. Howes brings a strong resume to the bench. In 1991 Ms. Howes became only the second woman judge in the history of Somerset County when she was appointed to the first of two terms as the Judge of the Raritan Borough Municipal Court. She was known as a tough but fair judge, who ran a tight ship and spoke Spanish from the bench.
Since then, she has served as a municipal prosecutor in Far Hills and Robbinsville, municipal public defender in Bernardsville and most recently as a member of the Peapack-Gladstone Borough Council.
This appointment is an honor. Ms. Howes is thankful for the opportunity to return to the bench. This appointment will not alter her practice in any dramatic way. She will continue as a partner in Howes & Howes, which will continue to be her primary occupation. Municipal court is a part-time job She is not giving up any of her current clients.
The appointment has, however, altered Ms. Howes’ participation in other community activities. She has resigned from the Peapack-Gladstone Borough Council, from the Board of Directors of Anderson House and from the District XIII Ethics Committee.
Saturday, November 19, 2011
Hudson County Success Story: Court Finds No Neglect Against H&H Client
Howes & Howes represents parents statewide. In a recent Hudson County case, the Division accused our client of perpetrating domestic violence, and the client’s spouse of failing to protect the children from the alleged domestic violence. The case was based almost entirely on the suspicions and hunches of the Division case worker. The case culminated in a fact-finding hearing. After two sessions of testimony, the trial court found no child abuse or neglect, and dismissed the case.
A recent Howes & Howes success story involved allegations that both parents had neglected their children by allowing them to be exposed to alleged domestic violence. A domestic violence perpetrator potentially neglects a child when he or she commits domestic violence. Likewise another adult who knowingly allows exposure to domestic violence also risks a finding of neglect. This is one of the most frequently litigated types of neglect cases under New Jersey law.
New Jersey law recognizes that children suffer actual harm, and are placed at risk of harm when they are exposed to domestic violence. Indeed, New Jersey courts have held that a pattern of parental conduct can place a child at risk of harm without proving a particular act of physical or similar domestic violence. D.Y.F.S. v. I.H.C. and D.C., 415 N.J. Super. 551 (App. Div. 2010) However, New Jersey courts also recognize that the act of allowing a child to witness domestic violence does not equate to abuse or neglect of the child in the absence of additional proofs. DYFS v. S.S. and F.S., 372 N.J. Super. 13 (App Div. 2004).
In our case, the Division had concerns about drug use in the home and about allegations of domestic violence in the home. In December 2010, the Division completed its investigation. At the conclusion of the investigation, the Division found that allegations of neglect were unsubstantiated against both parents. The case worker then remained involved in the case. In January, the family went on a family vacation. There was nothing preventing them from taking a family vacation together. There was no restraining order, no safety plan and no court order. Indeed, there was never a reported or substantiated incident of domestic violence, just evidence of marital contretemps.
Nevertheless, the Division intervened. They removed the children from the home and filed a child protective lawsuit against the parents.
At the first hearing, the court found that the children should be returned to the home. The family participated in services throughout and cooperated with those services fully.
The court held a fact-finding hearing in September and October. At that hearing, the defense established that (1) there were no substantiated domestic violence events; (2) that the Division ruled that allegations were unsubstantiated in December 2010; and (3) that nothing new happened to raise concerns that the children had been exposed to neglect or abuse between December 2010 and the time that the family went on vacation in January 2011. The court found that there had been no abuse or neglect of these children. In the end, the Division cannot prove a case against a parent based on the hunches or feelings of a case worker. That is exactly what the Division tried to do in this case, and they were unsuccessful.
Monday, October 03, 2011
A Child Alone in a Car: Neglect?
For years, DYFS has argued that the mere act of leaving a child unattended in a car means that a parent or guardian has committed child neglect. A recent decision of the New Jersey Appellate Division tells DYFS to wait just one minute. Leaving a child alone in a car is not in-and-of-itself grossly negligent, and therefore, is not neglect. Howes & Howes is involved in several such cases, and is prepared to defend a parent or guardian from allegations of neglect.
Let me preface this article by saying that Howes & Howes does not endorse the idea of leaving a small child unattended in a car. Doing so is not a good idea. It is probably negligent, so do not read this article and think that it is OK to leave your child alone in a car. That being said, the act of leaving a child unattended in a car, while possibly negligent, does not itself constitute child abuse or neglect under New Jersey law.
This is a common fact pattern. A parent is in a hurry. Too many errands; not enough time. To cut corners, the parent leaves a child in the car unattended while he or she runs in to make that last purchase. It is almost inevitable that someone will see the child alone in the car, and report it. The police arrive. They find the parent. They contact DYFS, who is obliged to investigate, and after investigation, usually finds that the parent has committed an act of neglect or abuse under New Jersey law.
That is a major problem because a substantiation places a parent in the DYFS Central Registry. (See our article “Escape from the DYFS Central Registry” on this website.) It is at this point that many law abiding parents contact Howes & Howes. There is good news for those parents because the New Jersey Appellate Division has issued an opinion in which it holds that the act of leaving a child alone in the car does not by itself constitute neglect. (Department of Children and Families v. A.S.)
Under New Jersey law, a parent or guardian must be grossly negligent to be found to have committed an act of child neglect. Whether a parent is grossly negligent will depend on the facts of each case and the history of each parent. For instance, how long was the child alone? Was he or she safe? Was he or she overheated? Did the child require medical attention? Does the parent have a history of good parenting? The answers to these and other questions will help Howes & Howes prepare your defense.
If DYFS has substantiated an allegation of neglect against you, then you have the right to appeal to the Office of Administrative Law. In the Office of Administrative Law, you have the right to an attorney and a full evidential hearing. If this is where you find yourself, then you should contact Howes & Howes.
Thursday, June 16, 2011
New Feature for www.njcases.com: NJ Election Law Blog
Howes & Howes has become one of the most active and respected election law firms in the State of New Jersey. We have been involved in many of the close elections and interesting legal issues in New Jersey in the past decade. And those that we are not directly involved in, we follow closely. In our new feature - NJ Election Law Blog - we will publish commentary on current cases and on developments in the law.
Elections provide some of the most fascinating legal issues at Howes & Howes. Election cases are usually high profile and fast moving. There are several election cycles throughout the year, and each cycle tends to produce interesting cases, many of which we become involved in. Generally speaking, the “seasons” of New Jersey elections are as follows:
Spring
March: Filing deadlines for non-partisan municipal races. These deadlines often produce petition challenges and ballot design (bracketing) issues.
April: 1.) Filing deadlines for party primaries. These deadlines often produce petition challenges and bracketing issues. 2.) School board elections. There is usually a school board or budget election that is close enough for a recount or election contest.
May: Non-partisan municipal elections. There is often an election close enough for a recount and/or a contest.
June: 1.) Party primaries. Occasionally there is a primary close enough for a recount and/or a contest. 2.) Filing deadlines for independent candidates. Independents often draw challenges to the sufficiency of their nominating petitions after the filing deadline.
Sunday, March 06, 2011
Big Brother is Watching Your Facebook Page
Online social networking has taken off in recent years. As more and more people establish Facebook accounts, society learns more about the advantages and disadvantages of online social networking. In New Jersey, the Division of Youth and Family Services has taken to monitoring Facebook pages. If you are involved with DYFS, what you say on Facebook can and will be used against you.
Facebook does not come with legal instructions or warnings. Facebook users jump right in, open an account and start publishing. Many Facebook users believe that because they are posting their status or their photos from the privacy of their personal computer that what they post is private. Well, it is not. It may as well be posted on a billboard on the New Jersey Turnpike because Big Brother is watching what you post. As an experienced DYFS attorney, I have begun to see that DYFS workers monitor Facebook. From what I have seen, DYFS monitors the Facebook accounts of parents who are caught in the DYFS web.
DYFS looks at the photos that parents post on their Facebook page. DYFS workers and supervisors will draw conclusions from those photos. DYFS will print certain photos, and through their attorneys, DYFS will attempt to introduce those photos in court for a variety of reasons. Photos are posted on Facebook that in the light of day can be very embarrassing and damaging. One exmaple: Photos taken at parties where alcohol is being consumed can cause legal problems for parents whom the court has ordered to abstain from drugs and alcohol.
DYFS will look at your status. DYFS believes that your Facebook status is a statement made by you that is admissible in court. DYFS might use your Facebook status in an attempt to prove that you used drugs or alcohol, or that you violated a provision of a court order. Beware that your status can be used against you, and if used against you, could derail your legitimate efforts to re-unite your family.
This is an emerging area of law. Howes & Howes has defended parents against DYFS intrusion into their lives for over a decade. Howes & Howes has developed a strategy to deal with the evidential use of Facebook data by DYFS. It is better, though, that you don’t do anything that you wouldn’t want the judge to know, and that you don’t post anything on Facebook that you wouldn’t want the judge to see.