Case Results

In a post-judgment marital dissolution matter BWBO successfully defended against Wife’s attempt to set aside the Judgment of Dissolution two years after entry of Judgment. Wife sought to be awarded millions of dollars representing what she claimed to be her share of several business interests, the value of which she claimed to have been undisclosed in the marital dissolution action. Husband contended that the business interests were his separate property and that Wife was aware of the values of the business interests at the time of the Judgment. Based on the same, Husband contended that Wife was not entitled to relief from the Judgment. The court sided with Husband and upheld the Judgment.

In a post-Judgment modification of support proceeding, BWBO moved to set aside a Stipulation and Order on behalf of their client, Husband, based on fraud committed by Wife in not disclosing her true income at the time the Stipulation and Order was entered. BWBO discovered that Wife had concealed her true income at the time the Stipulation and Order was entered, four years prior. Wife was actually making seven times the amount of income than what the Stipulation and Order was based on resulting in Wife receiving a windfall of support she was not actually entitled to. The court found that Wife had concealed her income and in doing so committed fraud. Based on the same, the court set aside the Stipulation and Order to Husband’s favor. The trial court’s decision was later upheld on appeal.

In a marital dissolution matter, Husband sought a Court order to sell the marital residence where Wife resided based on his alleged inability to maintain the costs associated with the residence. After a contested hearing, Husband’s request was denied because BWBO convinced the Court there was no risk to the community property as Husband was utilizing his income to pay for his own lavish lifestyle as opposed to maintaining the community residence where Wife resided.

Bremer Whyte Brown & O'Meara, LLP is proud to announce Associate Jocelyn Russo zealously represented their client in a domestic violence matter, resulting in the issuance of a restraining order and favorable custody orders for BWB&O's client.

BWB&O's client was stalked and harassed by her Husband for several years. The perpetrator denied all allegations and alleged that BWB&O’s client had no proof of harassment or stalking. Ultimately, the Court sided with BWB&O's client, finding that Husband had followed his Wife, stalked her through electronic means, and engaged in coercive control to the point that her peace was significantly disturbed. A restraining order was issued, Husband was ordered to move from the residence, and BWB&O’s client was awarded sole legal and physical custody of the minor children.

A temporary restraining order was recently obtained by Mom (Opposing Party), resulting in Dad, BWB&O’s client, having no custodial time with the minor child pending a hearing. BWB&O was retained after the temporary restraining order was granted. Associate Christina Batsakis then worked diligently with our client to prepare his testimony and gather evidence to rebut Mom’s allegations.

After several hours of testimony, including Christina’s stellar cross-examination, the Court denied the restraining order and immediately returned the child to our client. Our client and his parents, who attended the hearing, were incredibly grateful and relieved by the outcome. This significant victory highlights the importance of thorough preparation, compelling advocacy, and effectively challenging unsupported allegations in contested DVRO proceedings.