Excerpt from conversation on LinkedIn Integrative Law Group

Jeff Opperman

Director, Executive Communications at Pace University

I once spoke to an attorney who summed up family law perfectly. He said, "In a divorce it isn't just two people getting divorced, it's the two people plus their attorneys. And any one of the four can screw up the process at any time."

To compound matters, the family court system in our country is often antiquated and ill-equipped to deal with many of the very difficult issues that litigants bring to courts these days. Attorneys who exploit every crack and loophole in this antiquated and broken system may be working in their clients' best interests, but they do nothing to refute perceptions of unprofessionalism and self-service.

 

Eileen N. Nadelson

Judge -- NY State Courts

Jeff -- well said. I do believe that lawyers should advocate wholeheartedly for their clients, but there is a line to be drawn in the sand. We need to remember that we are professionals who are trained to legally strategize the issues. Acting as street fighters demeans yourself as well as the profession you represent.

Court As A Last Resort

Got a dispute? With the cleaners, the shoemaker, the neighbor, or even a family member? We are talking money here, or losses incurred from property damage. My advice: the last place to go is to court.

The first place to go is a conversation with the party who "wronged" you. I can hear the groans and envision the eye-rolling of the cynics. Trust me, the key is communication. Court is time-consuming, expensive, and nerve-wracking, and, once there, you will have to have that conversation, anyway. There is one major difference, however; the court, and I mean, the judge, decides the outcome.

At court, there is generally only one winner and, hence, a resultant loser. One party leaves happy, the other, deflated. A possibility lies in the realm outside the system where you and your antagonist may reach a satisfactory resolution. Since you must face the inevitable conversation, then it makes sense to initiate it on your own and eliminate the additional expenses that tally at court.

Here's the tip: practice what you must do at court, i.e., to stay calm. Focus on the problem - the loss, the damage - and not your personal vendetta against your antagonist. Whatever you may think of his/her/their behavior is not the issue. It will take some effort, but that's what works.

Believe me, most of the issues that come before me as judge could, and should, have been resolved outside the court's jurisdiction. What have you got to lose? If you lose your cool or cannot settle the dispute, you can always come to court.

Prejudiced? Who Isn't?

It's that time of year:  love is in the air, peace on earth, goodwill towards men (and women).  You are either frantically shopping the aisles for the right gift, or fighting a depressive funk from the stress of frantically shopping for the right gift.  All is well with the world and hate or prejudice is forgotten.   Perhaps, for the moment.

The truth is that our bias is never forgotten.  It comes with the package that we are.  It springs up spontaneously and, in our minds, is factually justified.  For instance, the person serving us is too slow, or looks different, or doesn't speak properly, or has a "cultural" attitude (fill in whatever reason that works for you).   It is the machine that runs and ruins our coexistence.  So, what do we do about it?  Nothing.

Prejudice is not a "bad" thing unless you act upon it.  And, you are not a "bad" person if you have it, unless you act upon it.  A thought is just a thought.  It has no power as long as it stays a thought.  And, you need not feel guilty about having that thought.  You will never like everybody, and not everybody will like you (oh no, that can't be).  So long as you keep your thoughts to yourself and keep your hands in your pockets (so no one gets hurt), who cares what you think?  Of course, if you have some good ideas to share, we will want to know what you think, but that's a topic for another article. 

Think about some "evil" thoughts that you may have harbored during your lifetime.  You want to kill him for doing that, get rid of him/her so you could be free, take that ----(whatever) from them.  You know what I mean.  They start in childhood and grow stronger in adulthood.  Chances are that you never fulfilled on any of those thoughts, although some nations and criminal minds have. 

So, you can stop beating yourself up about your prejudices.  You don't like blacks, whites, Indians?  Jews?  Christians?  Muslims?  Fat people?  Thin people?  Rich?  Poor?  Midwesterners?  (Who doesn't like Midwesterners?)  Urbanites?  Immigrants?  Pick the national origin that irks you.  Forgive me if I miss the particular prejudice that you have.  My response is:  so what! 

Your thoughts are your thoughts, and you are entitled to have them.  But, here's the hitch.  Keep your thoughts where they originated, in your mind, and no one gets hurt.  You don't have to invite the people you dislike to dinner, but you do have to live in the world with them.  Sorry about that.  Believe me, they don't like it as much as you don't.  Prejudices are part of the human condition.  Embrace them, acknowledge them, and live with them.  Just don't act on them.  Maybe, just maybe, if we all did that, there really would be peace on earth.

Go Ahead, Take the Risk!

Go Ahead, Take the Risk! from Martin Hara on Vimeo.

So You Have a Small CLaims Case? I Have Two Words For You.

The courts are choking with small claims cases (people demanding reimbursement under $5,000.00) brought by parties in dispute with the neighbor, the auto dealer, the furniture company, the floor contracter, the plumber, the dog walker, .... you fill in the blank. There are two very important words that must be remembered before you even bring the action, and they are: BE PREPARED.
Time and time again, I see litigants appear before the judge (which may be me) without any evidence to substantiate their claims. A small claims hearing is a mini trial. That means that you must show cause or reason for making your claim against the other party. As a defending party, you do not carry the burden of proof unless you are bringing a counterclaim. However, the defendant should "be prepared" if he/she wishes to refute any discrepancy in the claim or monies demanded. Even if the defendant does not appear for the trial, the claimant must still prove the claim. If you need a receipt, bring it; if you signed a contract, show it; if you need pictures, take them; if you have a witness, bring him or her along -- whatever will be necessary to show the judge that you are entitled to the amount you want reimbursed.
Remember, that small claims court is for money only, but the court will not pay you back for aggravation, emotional distress (unless there are related medical bills), or any other annoyances that have no monetary value. There may be other remedies for that - which is another topic of discussion.
What will happen if you come unprepared to court? The chances are quite good that you will lose your case - and you may never bring that same case against that same person(s) again. If you forgot any items that you think you may need for your case, you may request an adjournment for another trial date. So, whether or not you were a girl or boy scout, use their motto and BE PREPARED.

Taking Charge of Your Life

People sometimes do not realize how powerful they are - and how they can initiate change whenever they need it. Even in court, when life sometimes deals a blow to one's daily routine or well being, the power is still there. The challenge for everyone is to use it, knowing that it's there when you need it. Some people think that they are too helpless, hopeless, burdened, broken, or whatever to do anything about their situation. But I am not buying that excuse. Every individual has the power to choose and take action to change their lives when they are present to the opportunities before them. In court, a man in his 40's stood before me after an arrest for drug dealing. After reviewing his rap sheet and history, I simply stated to him that he needed a job, that he had too much time to dabble in criminal activity, and that it was time for him to take charge of his life. I suggested that he discuss with his counsel the various options with agencies for job training, for handling drug abuse and for other matters. Although he nodded in agreement, I could not be sure if he was undertstanding his situation or was just placating me in court.
Well, guess what? A couple of weeks later, he was back ... to say that he had taken my advice. He entered a drug program, started a job training program and was to be placed in a position this week. What he said to me was the ultimate confirmation of my commitment. He said "no one had ever offered me a chance or opportunity like that .....", then thanked me over and over again. He also gave me his supervisor's name at the drug program who also wanted to thank me for my time and effort on this man's behalf. This was an epiphany for me as a public servant. It's this kind of positive action that defines my personal stand for contribution to the community and the world.

Seminar on Contracts at NYCounty Lawyers Assn

Please click here to see a preview of my seminar on contracts. This seminar is given at the NY County Lawyers Assn. twice a year as part of their Continuing Legal Education Bridge the Gap program.
http://www.lawline.com/cle/course-details.php?i=490

Judicial Selection Revisited

The current hue and cry is for a review of our judicial system, its independence and its efficiency. The first thing that comes to mind among the majority of my colleagues is that we need to institute a "merit" system for the appointment of judges. I totally disagree. I think appointment of judges is just another avenue for perpetuating political favoritism.
The traditional method was to permit the election of judges and give the public some input into the judicial system. However, when politics squirmed itself inside the system , judicial "elections" became tainted, partisan and in some cases, political scandals. The usual knee-jerk reaction is for "well-meaning" groups to dump the system and set up a new format for appointing judges.
What happened to our focus on "we the people" or public participation or democratic involvement? If the current system is not working because of corrupt politicians, why penalize the public? If anything, we need even stronger public participation. The public needs to have an open conversation about the dynamics of judicial selection to create the fair and honest system it was intended to be. If the various interest groups (both lay and legal) get what they want, the power and control will remain driven by special interests.
Think about this: you either take responsibility to create the kind of judicial system that works for all of us, or sit back and watch others give you the kind of judicial system that works for them.

Video Interview On Public Outreach

Judge Eileen Nadelson of NYC speaks about an innovative program that will serve to resolve problems before they end up in court. During this interview on June 29th, 2006, the Judge discussed areas where the government and communities could be MORE EMPOWERED to resolve critical issues today through conversations and alternative actions.

Click Sreen to Play Video >>>

Video Source: http://www.videoegg.com/video/chwIqC

Judge Nadelson Profile

Judge Nadelson brings a varied background to her judicial position. She began her career as an educator before entering the commercial world and operating her own business. Following a clerkship with the New York State Attorney General’s Office in the Investor Protection and Securities Divisions, she entered the private practice of law. Her focus was on corporate and commercial matters, representing both entrepreneurs and consumers. For nearly two years during her legal career, she developed and oversaw the curricula and course studies for New York University’s Law and Taxation Division. Judge Nadelson also actively participated as an arbitrator at the State Courts and American Arbitration Association and provided services to the Federal Court Pro Se Office. She is admitted to practice in the Southern and Eastern Districts of New York, as well as before the esteemed justices of the United States Supreme Court.

Ms. Nadelson holds a B.A. degree in Economics/Political Science. While working full time, she attended law school and was elected to Law Review, serving as a senior editor.

Judge Nadelson is a former president of the New York City League of Women Voters, and was elected to the New York City Civil Court in 2001. Shortly after her induction, Judge Nadelson began an outreach to the public and legal community by providing seminars on the subjects of Contracts and Civil Court Practice. She also speaks at public forums on topics such as Small Claims and Court Procedures, Handling Consumer/Merchant Disputes, and Avoiding Scams. Since February, 2006, she has been presiding as a judge in Criminal Court, Kings County. Judge Nadelson’s accomplishments are recognized and listed in a number of prestigious registries including, Who’s Who in American Law, Who’s Who in America, Who’s Who of American Women, and Who’s Who Worldwide.

Nadelson On Education

Judge Eileen Nadelson of New York comments on the new reality in the United States today. Her declaration is an urgent call to action to empower people with education.


Video Interview http://www.videoegg.com/video/iUOOW

Are you a Skeptic of the Judicial System?

For all of you skeptics out there who dislike judges or distrust the judicial system, here is an opportunity that could make a difference: I want to hear ALL of your complaints and criticisms. State your comments to me and I promise to listen and follow up with a response. You have my guarantee to listen and check out your reasons, no matter how small. It is never too small a matter with me whenever the public loses confidence in its judicial base. The Judiciary System is the last bastion of the freedom and liberty we cherish in America. As a judge, I intend to protect those fundamental rights by confronting people with a simple truth:

If you can state your complaints in public, then you are also capable of doing something about them.

I want you to initiate a dialog with me to hash out the issues in our system that do not work or that fall short of expectations . Let's all step up to the plate and voice our opinions to a broader audience- Let's get ready to hear the opinion of others and expand our thinking and our way of life. Now is a good time to start.

Judge Nadelson