A putative father is either asserting paternity or contesting his parentage of a child in the absence of a presumption of determined legal status. Under state and federal law, the putative father has certain rights, but is very restricted in how he may assert those rights. Generally, when a child is born of the marriage, there is a presumption that the husband is the legal father, and paternity shall not be challenged as a matter of law.

The purpose of this presumption is to protect children from the stigma of illegitimacy, which would deprive them of their rights of inheritance and succession. This presumption is "one of the strongest and most pervasive known to the law." In re Findlay, 428 N.Y.S. 2d 865 (1980). G.L. c. 209C, Section 5(a) specifically does not permit a paternity action to be brought by a putative father. However, this does not take away the right of the putative father to bring a complaint to establish paternity under the general equity jurisdiction of the probate and family court under G.L. c. 209C, Section 6. To do so, The court must examine the relationship as a whole with the child, taking into account such factors as emotional bonds, economic support, custody of the child, personal association, putative father's commitment to attending to the child's needs, as well as any other factors that bear on the nature of the alleged parent-child relationship.

In addition to the above, the putative father must develop a solid legal and factual record, set forth in a sworn, verified complaint, or an affidavit to meet the high standard to rebut the presumption of legitimacy, which is proof beyond a reasonable doubt. At the end of the day, the decision must be what is in the best interest of the child.

When divorce begins, it's quite common for the husband or wife of a business owner to feel vulnerable. After all, if they've been left out of the loop, they have no true understanding of the finances of the business. Moreover, they fear their spouse will hide assets, or even follow-through on their threats or tricks to leave their partner with no part of what is, most likely, one of the largest assets in the parties' joint marital estate.

For starters, consider these two pieces of advice: first, don't listen to your spouse. Instead, when you want to know what will happen on your day in court, do some reading of your own. Secondly, do more research on family-owned business problems in divorce.

What follows is the overview of what you should be focusing on:

1. When two parties divorce, and one has a business ownership interest, one spouse wants the business to be as big as Warren Buffet's empire, and the other wants it to look like the business is going under (I refer to this as "RAIDS" - Recently Acquired Income Deficiency Syndrome).

2. The problem is that business owners have many options to hide money or control the finances and how they are written up on tax returns.

3. Our attorneys most commonly start the discovery process by sending a request for production of documents. Along with the help from our business valuation experts, we look for: phantom employees that don't exist, business property leased from unknown people or corporate entities, an unusual imbalance between earnings and assets, and improper personal expenses flowing through the business.

Business owners have real opportunities when it comes to divorce. At the same time, many spouses go without rightful property division, child support and alimony because they don't have the energy or know-how to discover the truth. You owe it to yourself - and to your children - and our attorneys encourage you to contact us for a no-obligation consultation.

When one parent wants to relocate with children, custody and modification issues are often triggered. The non-moving parent has a legitimate concern as a move out-of-state often interferes with that parent's parenting time, not to mention an interference with a prior Agreement.

Whether a relocation issue is being precipitated by a job transfer, a remarriage, or some other reason, our lawyers can help. If you're the parent who wants to oppose the move, contact us to help you present a compelling case as to why the move is not in your child's best interest.

The parent who wants to move with the child must file a Complaint for Modification in court and seek permission to relocate. Case law on this matter dictates that the Judge, after listening to all of the evidence, must decide whether there is a real advantage in the move, and whether the move out of state is in the child's best interest.

As a general proposition, the court will look at the continuity and stability of the current arrangement and the harm that may result from disruption of established patterns of care. Additionally, the Judge will weigh the reasons for the proposed move, the effect of the move on the child's access to the other parent, the impact of the move on the current relationship between the left-behind parent and the child, the distance and travel arrangements required by the move, the parties' past compliance with court orders, and the wishes of the child, if the child is of the age and maturity to have a say in the matter.

If you are not the primary custodial parent, or if the children are not moving with you, your schedule may be altered. The good news behind all of this is Judges put their best foot forward in making a ruling in such a way that the child's best interests are made the top priority - first and foremost. Quite often, instead of the issue being viewed in a black or white matter, Judges have a way of using shades of grey in a way that everybody benefits and nobody loses. Contact us to learn more.