<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="0.92">
<channel>
	<title>Labor &#38; Employment &#124; Family Law &#124; Criminal Defense &#124; Maya Murphy Attorneys at Law &#124; Westport CT</title>
	<link>http://mayalaw.com</link>
	<description>Family law and divorce attorneys, labor and employment discrimination, special education and criminal defense attorneys.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 20 Feb 2012 23:00:19 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<docs>http://backend.userland.com/rss092</docs>
	<language>en</language>
	<!-- generator="WordPress/3.1.2" -->

	<item>
		<title>Court Transfers Guardianship of Child to Maternal Grandmother</title>
		<description><![CDATA[In a recent case involving the Department of Children and Families, the Court granted a mother’s motion to transfer guardianship to the child’s maternal grandmother.  DCF initially became involved in the matter after receiving reports that the parents were engaging in domestic violence and substance abuse.  Although the Court originally entered an order of protective [...]]]></description>
		<link>http://mayalaw.com/2012/02/court-transfers-guardianship-of-child-to-maternal-grandmother/</link>
			</item>
	<item>
		<title>Despite Father’s Unemployment, Court Awards Support Based on Earning Capacity</title>
		<description><![CDATA[Recently, a Connecticut Superior Court again applied the principle of utilizing a party’s “earning capacity” – rather than actual earnings &#8211; to the modification of a support award in post-judgment matrimonial action.  Earning capacity is not an amount that a person can “theoretically earn,” nor is it confined to actual income, but rather it is [...]]]></description>
		<link>http://mayalaw.com/2012/02/despite-father%e2%80%99s-unemployment-court-awards-support-based-on-earning-capacity/</link>
			</item>
	<item>
		<title>Court Permits Trasfer of Guardianship to Out-Of-State Aunt</title>
		<description><![CDATA[In a recent decision involving the Department of Children and Families, a Connecticut trial court granted a maternal aunt’s motions for out-of-state placement and transfer of guardianship.  The children were originally removed from the mother’s care pursuant to an Order of Temporary Custody upon allegations that they were being denied proper care and attention, and [...]]]></description>
		<link>http://mayalaw.com/2012/02/court-permits-trasfer-of-guardianship-to-out-of-state-aunt/</link>
			</item>
	<item>
		<title>Court Approves Permanancy Plan Including Termination of Parental Rights</title>
		<description><![CDATA[In a recent decision involving the Department of Children and Families, the Court overruled the respondent mother’s objection to a proposed permanency plan that included termination of parental rights and adoption.  At the time of the hearing, the children were fourteen and eleven years old.  They both had special educational needs and were victims of [...]]]></description>
		<link>http://mayalaw.com/2012/02/court-approves-permanancy-plan-including-termination-of-parental-rights/</link>
			</item>
	<item>
		<title>Court May Terminate Parental Rights Even Though Adoption Arrangement is not Secured</title>
		<description><![CDATA[In the case of In Re Davonta V., 285 Conn. 483 (2007), the Connecticut Supreme Court addressed whether it is ever in  a child’s best interest to terminate parental rights when an adoptive family has not yet been secured.  In that case, the child was the subject of a neglect petition filed by the Department [...]]]></description>
		<link>http://mayalaw.com/2012/02/court-may-terminate-parental-rights-even-though-adoption-arrangement-is-not-secured/</link>
			</item>
	<item>
		<title>Court Denies Foster Parent&#8217;s Right to Intervene in DCF Proceeding</title>
		<description><![CDATA[In a recent decision involving the Department of Children and Families, the Superior Court (Simon, J.) precluded a foster parent from intervening in proceedings designed to reunify a child with her biological father.  DCF originally filed a request for an order of temporary custody, which the Court sustained by agreement, as well as a neglect [...]]]></description>
		<link>http://mayalaw.com/2012/02/court-denies-foster-parents-right-to-intervene-in-dcf-proceeding/</link>
			</item>
	<item>
		<title>Request for Attorneys&#8217; Fees Denied:  Court finds that wife “cannot be rewarded for her own financial indiscretions.”</title>
		<description><![CDATA[This week, the Superior Court in the Judicial District of Fairfield (Owens, JTR) issued a decision following a contested post-judgment divorce hearing in which an ex-wife sought counsel fees from her ex-husband in an amount of “not less than $50,000.00.” The parties, who had been divorced since shortly after their divorce trial in the spring [...]]]></description>
		<link>http://mayalaw.com/2012/02/request-for-attorneys-fees-denied-court-finds-that-wife-%e2%80%9ccannot-be-rewarded-for-her-own-financial-indiscretions-%e2%80%9d/</link>
			</item>
	<item>
		<title>Court Modifies Unallocated Support Down to $3,200 per Month</title>
		<description><![CDATA[In Rosen v. Grand, Superior Court, Judicial District of Stamford-Norwalk, Docket No. FSTFA044000277S (Aug. 25, 2011, Wenzel, J.), the plaintiff husband filed a motion to modify his unallocated alimony and support payments six years after the parties’ divorce.  The plaintiff and defendant were originally married in 1989 and had two children together. When they were [...]]]></description>
		<link>http://mayalaw.com/2012/02/court-modifies-unallocated-support-down-to-3200-per-month/</link>
			</item>
	<item>
		<title>Complying with the FBAR</title>
		<description><![CDATA[If you have a foreign financial account, the federal Bank Secrecy Act may require you to report the foreign bank and financial account (“FBAR”) yearly to the I.R.S. by filing Form TD F-90-22.1.  The purpose of the FBAR is to help the U.S. government investigate persons who may be using foreign financial accounts for illegal [...]]]></description>
		<link>http://mayalaw.com/2012/02/complying-with-the-fbar/</link>
			</item>
	<item>
		<title>Court Awards Wife Alimony in the Amount of $6,000 Per Month</title>
		<description><![CDATA[In Klages v. Klages, Superior Court, Judicial District of Fairfield at Bridgeport, Docket No. FV104034594S, the plaintiff wife and defendant husband were married in Pennsylvania on October 9, 1993.  At the time of trial, they had four children ranging in age from six to eleven. The husband had been employed in the insurance industry throughout [...]]]></description>
		<link>http://mayalaw.com/2012/02/court-awards-wife-alimony-in-the-amount-of-6000-per-month/</link>
			</item>
</channel>
</rss>

