Ma'am, You Are Not Allowed In the Court Room

In the Circuit Court in this fine county of Gloucester, VA, Fridays are the days upon which matters of divorce are heard. The "Pendente Lite" hearing in my own divorce was held on a Friday two weeks ago. The problem with any of this is that I don't really understand what is going to happen, until after it happens. Sadly, by then it is a little too late. So, having been sorely disappointed in the judge's refusal to hear any fault OR to consider my budget worksheet before issuing his Pendente Lite order for spousal support and more, I decided I needed to educate myself.

My attorney is not the strategical technician I need to succeed in this matter. After all, it is my attorney who failed to inform me that there would be no court recorder for the hearing on my motion to dismiss adverse counsel for conflict of interest, held three weeks prior. Silly me, when I saw no human sitting there capturing the proceedings, I presumed there was electronic recording....when I called the Clerk of the Court to inquire on the transcript, I was informed that, unless one of the parties had provided a court recorder (person), there was no transcript...it was, afterall, a "court of no record." Well, live and learn....

So, I decided to take a vacation day from work Friday and spend that time in my first "seminar"....right there in the very same court room, with the same judge presiding and the same handful of attorneys arguing for their clients. I arrived after the 9:00 docket had completed, but in time for the 10:00 docket. There were, I believe, five cases to be heard in that time slot. I sat in the very back corner of the court room, on the very hard bench, armed with my spiral notebook and a pen....

"All Rise," the Bailiff called to order and all obeyed, standing for the entrance of "his Honor."

The cases were varied and interesting to me. I took lots of notes. I noted, most importantly, that none of these cases were heard with the benefit of a court recorder. Now, after my first such experience, I can assure you, I will not proceed in another hearing without one. The preservation of the record is well worth the cost. So, as I said, these proceedings were off the record, and the rulings thereon are, therefore, necessarily reliant on the judge's own notes and recollections....notes and recollections that are not viewable by the public, I might add. And when the judge makes his decisions, it is not he who then pens his orders, and rulings, but rather, one of the counsel arguing the case....

In the selection of cases that day were an uncontested, but fault-based divorce, pendente lite hearing in which the complainant was suing for divorce based on charges of adultery. The opposing counsel argued that the VA code required a 6-month separation before such a complaint could be heard... the judge asked counsel to name the code upon which she was relying...suffice to say, she was wrong and the judge declared that in matters concerning adultery, there is no waiting period requirement... and so, though in MY pendente lite hearing, the judge declared he would not listen to any fault, indicating, "I never have and I'm not going to start now," indeed I beg to differ on the "I never have".... or perhaps, he just started two weeks later, because, correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't adultery a fault-based complaint?

Never mind, so the judge allowed not only the fault to be introduced into the proceeding, but also allowed the Defendant to be sworn in and examined by counsel for the Plaintiff. She took him through all of the allegations of sexual harassment on females in his 10 year career, from which he was fired for cause... and she successfully argued that because he was fired for cause, and for cause substantially related to the fault-based claim of the complaint for divorce, his income should be imputed to reflect the higher earning he'd been earning from that employer, rather than his current income. The judge accepted it all and imputed his income and issued the instructions to counsel to determine the amount of spousal support for the pendente lite period accordingly.....

So, I learned a valuable lesson.... the judge is less than consistent.... he only considers fault in a pendente lite hearing if he wants to... now, it could well be that the fault upon which this complaint for divorce was filed, has been agreed to by the defendant and therefore the judge did not have to decide on the fault, but only on the consequences thereof.... I'll have to do more research before I can make that determination.

Another case was a SHOW CAUSE case wherein the Plaintiff requested the Defendant show cause for his failure to comply with the final divorce decree and the equitable distribution of assets, as ruled. This was a little more complicated, and the details were interesting, to be sure, but more interesting to me was the fact that the counsel for the Defendant was the conflicted attorney who was my counsel in my first divorce and who is now representing my husband in this divorce. And also interesting were the arguments he raised to help his client avoid the payment of the court ordered equitable distribution amounts...well, at least until such time as his client could prevail in a related, but as yet unfiled lawsuit, which, counsel for Defendant reminded the Court, could take a couple of years.... Judge was not particularly impressed with the argument presented, and tried to find a way to make the Defendant liquidate other assets to help meet the obligation... the Defendant, at the time of this hearing, was $60K in arrears.... They determined he would transfer his share of the already equitably distributed 401K to her, but that the details of the amount by which this would reduce his arrearages would have to be later determined...counsel for Defendant argued that the only other asset which could be liquidated was the Defendant's pricey motorcycle, but since that was this man's "only toy" and "every man should be allowed one toy." The judge wasn't impressed, but didn't rule that the motorcycle had to be liquidated..... The Defendant left unhappy with the ruling and, I suspect, his counsel....

Another case was a motion to compel the production of discovery documents, and to require the Defendant subject himself to a firm who would determine his earning potential.... counsel arguing that this man was, by choice, underemployed..... (Counsel in this case, is, again, my conflicted attorney). Now this man, the Defendant, has no counsel representing him in this hearing. It was unclear to me whether he had counsel at all, but I am pretty sure he had counsel at one time, based on his testimony. This day, however, he stood alone. Counsel stated he'd received no income or discovery documents requested from this man, and the man claimed he'd FAXed them timely..... Counsel claimed the man was voluntarily underemployed, and the man explained that he is 55 years old (that's what I heard, but I think he looked more like 65 ) and no matter what an employment analyst says, it is hard to get work at that age....

Counsel argued, and the man, genuine to the bone, held his own... he'd FAXed the documents on 2/11/10, and had done so twice, but no matter, because he also had them with him there, that day. Judge asked the man if he had a reason for not submitting to the employment analysis, and the man said he was required to pay for that and the attorneys fees.... Counsel argued that was not true and the man agreed to subject himself accordingly.... Counsel challenged the man on his statement of FAXing the docs in February.... man claimed he'd discarded the cover sheets of the FAX, and Counsel started his campaign to discredit the man...at which point the man found the cover sheet that proved his truthfulness.... so, counsel did not apologize for calling the man a liar, but, instead, challenged him on what number he'd sent them to, why he'd FAXed them twice, etc... generally beating this guy up... the man stood his ground, and the judge told Counsel to review the docs and get on with the request. They adjourned for 10 minutes to allow the review of the docs.

I sat there in the back with my notes after the judge left the room. Conflicted Counsel left the room too, and as he left he did a double-take when he saw me... our eyes met and he was not pleased. I decided to leave the room for a minute to write down the cases on the docket posted on the door. I didn't hide what I was doing, as this, I believe, is all public information. Once I had them jotted down, I returned to my seat in the back corner. Conflicted Counsel, now back in the courtroom said something to Bailiff and Bailiff headed directly toward me. At the end of the bench upon which I sat, he stopped and beckoned for me to follow him. Outside the courtroom I was questioned,

"Do you have involvement in any of the cases being heard here today?"
"No."
"Are you a reporter?"
"No, I am doing research..."
"Well, you can't go in there, you have to leave."
"Really? Isn't this a public court? Aren't these public proceedings?"
"No, not in Divorce cases. Unless you are one of the parties...."
"Really, I thought only if they included juveniles...."
"No, you can check with the Clerk of the Court if you like, I'm sorry but you're not allowed in..."

With which he dismissed me, returning to the courtroom.... I took his advice and headed in to see the Clerk of the Court.

Now, despite their ridiculously huge and fancy courthouse, Gloucester County is Gloucester County.... I have NEVER encountered efficiency or competence herein and this day was no different. In the Clerk's office, there was a line of ONE... one man trying to pay something (court costs presumably) and THREE women, none of whom were able to determine what was wrong with the computer .... blah, blah, blah... I waited my turn.... five minutes into my wait and no closer to actually being served, the Bailiff appeared through the same door which I had entered....he was all smiles and apologetic... he'd been wrong, it seems, only those divorce proceedings for which the Counsel has requested the hearing be "closed" are off limits to the public....

Funny change of heart, I thought, well aware of the reason I'd been instructed to leave. I suppose those dusky glass globes on the ceiling of the courtroom must, indeed, be cameras, and the judge must, indeed have seen what was going on.... now, I don't know the details, but I am SURE that had I left the building when instructed to, nobody would have run out to the parking lot to apologize and invite me back in... no, I called their bluff and they had no other options....

Why, I wondered, would this Conflicted Counsel be so eager to expel me from a public forum? I was not disruptive. I was not rude to anyone. In fact, I was so NON- intrusive that, until Conflicted Counsel was leaving the courtroom, he had no idea I was there. I presume the judge did, but I never looked at him....my eyes were always on my notes. Well, I suppose I can take a stab at why Conflicted Counsel was unhappy with my presence.... after all, I did file a motion to have him removed as counsel for my husband in our divorce, based on his conflict of interest, AND I did file a complaint with the BAR because he failed to return to me my files, inclusive of his notes which he read aloud at the "court of no record" hearing held on the matter...and I did file an updated BAR complaint because he returned only partial files after being ordered to return all files..... Yeah, I get it, Conflicted Counsel is not happy with me.... oh, but wait ... I discovered another reason Conflicted Counsel would prefer I not witness the proceedings....

When the Court was once again in session, Conflicted Counsel had to admit to the Court that he had contacted his paralegal during the break and had, in fact, been informed that the FAXed documents this man alleged he'd sent HAD indeed been received by his office on 2/11/10, AND that they had been filed in the wife's file....because there was no indication they had come from the husband.... Now DUH... so he HAS the docs in his folder, and he is alleging that he believes the WIFE FAXed in the discovery docs requested of the husband.... how LAME an excuse for LYING to the Court can one Conflicted Counsel offer?

Yes, yes, now I better understand his rationale for getting me out of there... I would see him repeating his practice of lying to the Court.... I guess I'd believed that Counsel were required to speak the truth, as they believe it to be, in the Court....but this Conflicted Counsel lied in the Conflict of Interest hearing and he also lied to the Court during my pendente lite hearing on two occasions.... the first was when he alleged my current husband stayed at home to raise my children while I worked outside the home...he knows differently, knows, in fact, that my children were nearly grown when we married and were out of the house two years after our wedding date... he knows this because of his representation of me in my first divorce, and the related child support issues.... Conflicted Counsel also lied to the Court when he declared I had not provided earnings documentation to allow for the determination of spousal support to be paid his client... the abusive, refusing to work, drug addict and alcoholic.... Even the Court should have known this was a falsehood, given that they AND Conflicted Counsel were provided pertinent documentation three days prior to the pedente lite hearing.... Nevertheless.... good for me to know this... Conflicted Counselor is not hampered by any ethics....

So, after the break and the admittance by Conflicted Counsel that he'd received this guy's documents, he then proceeded to demand the court consider the fact that his client, who, at the time of filing the complaint for divorce, was earning $600-700 per month from Social Security, and now that the husband was making $80K per year, she had lost her SS benefits.... so, the Court should rule the husband pay more in spousal support.... Now, pinch me and tell me I'm in la-la land, but isn't this the SAME Conflicted Counselor who started this whole case be saying the husband was voluntarily under-employed? And now wasn't he arguing that the $80K of underemployment was too much to allow his client to receive her SS income?????

OK, just label me confused... I'll have to reflect on that one a while longer....

I stayed for the final cases, and then returned to the Clerk's office to get the ruling on when I am and when I am not allowed in these fine courtrooms.... She was pretty vague... if the hearing is closed, for instance, they will not put a sign on the door or anything, or a note on the docket (God Forbid)... no, if it is closed, they will simply ask you to leave when you walk in.... Not sure what small town I have been living in for 22 years, but this sounds just a wee bit odd... sounds as if -- just perhaps -- a LOT of the public is asked to leave hearings, not on the basis that the hearing is closed, but for reasons which very likely violate the Freedom of Information Act.... Show me something that SAYS a hearing is closed and I will respect that... but just walk up to me and inform me I am not allowed in the Court Room??? In the Court Room which I pay dearly for with my tax dollars? In the Court Room where MY fate is also being shaped? In the Court of No Record..... Gloucester, Virginia.....