William Garvey

The client came to us after being represented by another firm. Se was unhappy with the settlement she felt her attorneys forced her into accepting during mediation and their refusal to issue discovery to identify assets she believed her husband was hiding. I was able to get the mediation agreement set aside and issued discovery which resulted in finding an addition $1.2 million in assets that her husband failed to disclose. At the permanent orders hearing, the client was awarded an additional 5% of the marital estate for her husbands efforts to hide assets and a proven pattern of financial abuse. This client later came back to us for  modification of maintenance  after her ex husband obtained a higher paying job that was inline with the income he had been earning throughout the marriage. We were able to reach an agreement at mediation for a large lump sum payment of maintenance greater than the court had ordered at the prior permanent orders hearing. 

Dissolution of marriage with children. Mother had made false allegations to police that resulted in the arrest of the client and reduced parenting time at a temporary orders hearing. Mother wanted client to have minimal parenting time, sought sole decision making, and requested a 60/40 split of marital assets in her favor. A CFI was involved in this case and helped show inconsistencies with Mother’s claims throughout the case. The end result of the case was Father receiving 50/50 custody of the children and sole decision making for all major medical decisions related to the children and a 50/50 division of marital assets all marital assets. This was the settlement offer we had proposed several time to Mother, but she had refused repeatedly throughout the case. 

Highly contested divorce regarding allocation of parental rights. The parties had temporary parenting plan agreement for 50/50 parenting time with joint decision making. A CFI was appointed to make recommendations for parenting time. Shortly  after the temporary parenting agreement was put in place, the minor child refused to spend any overnights with Father due to his behavior during his parenting time. The parties had a hearing regarding enforcement of the temporary parenting time schedule where the court determined the child would not be forced to spend overnights with father against his wishes. The CFI report was issued a few days after the hearing and recommended no parenting time for Father. Mediation between the parties was unsuccessful because Father sought no parenting time but wanted to avoid paying child support. Shortly before the case was set for trial, Governor Polis signed into law a modification that drastically changed how courts analyze parental responsibilities and parenting time.  The parties were able to reach a full agreement less than a week before trial with Father having 50/50 parenting time on paper, paying $419 a month in child support, Father completing a domestic violence evaluation and following any recommended treatment, and Mother having sole decision making for all major medical decisions. The outcome for the case was exactly what Mother wanted and likely a better outcome than would have been achieved at the permanent orders hearing.