Yahoo Finance reported today that foreclosure filings, which have stalled for the better part of last year as banks tried to cope with robo-signing, lost mortgage notes, mergers & acquisitions, and the Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac debacles, are now on the rebound.

Last year's stall was caused by artificial reasons - mainly political, legal and administrative. This year's rebound is the result of the thawing of some of the barriers that caused last year's freeze: banks have combed over foreclosure files looking for errors, (some) financial reforms have been enacted and, last but not least, courts cannot put off foreclosures  indefinitely - after all, there is that little thing called due process which applies equally to the plaintiff, not just the defendant.  

How well will this work for banks? I'm betting that it's not going to be all smooth sailing. Tons upon tons of mortgage notes out there are still lost and they need to be reconstituted by the banks - which practically transforms the foreclosure process into something it was not conceived to be:  a trial based on evidence, as a opposed to a liquidation procedure. Furthermore, court budgets aren't getting any better, so even if judges won't have a choice but to put foreclosures on their calendars, lack of personnel and docket time will translate into long stretches between court dates and continuances galore. In conclusion, the pace of foreclosures won't light the world on fire....  

Read the entire story at http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Mortgage-default-warnings-apf-157937671.html?x=0

This NY Times story reprises a topic that has been printed about all over the country - that of Chinese pregnant women who spend thousands of dollars to enter the US illegally just to give birth to their children on US soil. After giving birth, these women return to China, the only benefit of their travails being the U.S. birth certificate of their offspring, granting them automatic American citizenship.

For me, this begs the question: how many of us are valuing our U.S. citizenship and would be willing to sacrifice equally to what these women have to go through for the sake of their children? Are we really aware of how fortunate we are to live in a country where the political police doesn't tear down our doors in the middle of the night to drag us and our loved ones to be tortured and/or sent to some hellish gulag for the "crime" of speaking up our minds freely? Do we appreciate often enough the clean water that our children are drinking, the fresh air they are breathing, the plentiful food they are eating? Are we thankful enough that we can worship freely our God, or conversely, that we do not have to worship any deity should we choose not to?

Read the whole story at:  http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/29/us/29babies.html

I vividly remember September 11, 2001. For me, it started out as any other day (I was in law school back then) but it turned into a hurt like I hope I will never again experience in my life.

This article from Fox News caught my attention because it describes September 11 as seen through the eyes of a child of the day, a child whose father left for work that morning to his job as the manager of a restaurant on the 110th floor of one of the towers. The father managed to escape from the day's inferno but the restaurant he managed lost 83 employees.

The father now works for his own brother, having left behind the city but not the memories of that dreadful day. The article excels at the description of the wholesomeness of the boy's family, both before and especially after September 11. A normally functioning family is an incredibly powerful entity and it is amazing to me how many people do not invest in building a strong family structure or, if they attain it, are willing to squander it for more or less trifle reasons.

As a family law attorney, I can attest that building your family strong, like a durable yet gentle fabric that is both tear-proof and flexible, is the solution to many of life's trials. I hope the reader is in agreement.

Read the whole story at http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2011/09/09/my-dad-windows-on-world-and-11/

Hollywood has always cashed in on "man's man" actor figures, from Robert Taylor to John Wayne to Clint Eastwood, including Mel Gibson. While most of the other testosterone-laden male movie stars were habitual offenders of marital fidelity, divorce and remarriage, Mr. Gibson seemed intent on carrying the torch of the committed family man, a devout Catholic and recovering alcoholic who seemed intent to steer clear of the philandering Hollywood superstar stereotype.

That all came crashing down with his DUI arrest during which he spewed antisemitic invectives to the arresting officer. His marriage collapsed soon after and, as if to make good on lost years of extramarital frolicking, he quickly secured the graces of a gorgeous Russian musician (see pictures here) who also had the good fortune to become pregnant by Gibson.

The couple's separation was followed by a long and bitter legal dispute over financial support of mother and child (the couple's daughter will turn 2 in October). On Wednesday the judge approved of the settlement the parties finally reached, which includes the payment by Gibson of $750,000 to the ex-girlfriend, the payment of support to the child equal to what the actor provides to his other 7 children, and continued payments on the multimillion dollar house he purchased for the ex-girlfriend and their daughter.

Lessons to be learned (especially if you are not a Hollywood superstar with fat bank accounts):

1) Fatherhood is not a game. Sowing your oats is not a fantasy sport and normal, hard-working stiffs will find it very hard to abide by judge-imposed orders of spousal and/or child support AND move on with your life.

2) If you want to start a family, make sure you understand the type of commitment it takes both on your part and of your bride's. Does she seem the type that has what it takes to stick it out though thin and thick? How are her parents like, what values has she received in her upbringing? Are you one to stand by her side when things get nasty (and they will at times, make no mistake about it), whether for financial, medical or personal reasons?

3) Divorce, especially if children are involved, is a very damaging process. Attempt spousal counseling, church counseling and any other kind of support accessible to you before considering divorce. Absent spousal violence, there is hope that, with help, both you and your spouse will receive wisdom from these third parties that will help you bridge the difficult times you are going through....

Read the whole story at  http://news.yahoo.com/mel-gibson-pay-ex-750k-settle-custody-case-162602490.html

CNN reports that thousands of brides are ticked off at mother nature for having hurricane Irene throw a wrench in their wedding plans. The first question that popped into my mind was that the thousands of grooms that were similarly affected were not credited by the article as going through similar emotions as the brides. So the article makes the assumption that males are not as emotionally committed to marriage as females are, which to me appears as clear bias on the part of the writer. It is the same bias that shows up in a lot of family courts where, despite the fact that the law on the books no longer favors mothers to the detriment of fathers when custody of the children is awarded, in practice mothers enjoys an unwritten advantage that tips the scale in their favor.

The second question that I pose to the reader is regarding the wisdom of spending thousands of dollars on a wedding ceremony when not only statistics (roughly 50% of weddings end up in divorce) but also the weather conspire against the wedding being a success. Isn't it time that America embarks on a new tradition, of small and modest weddings and a big bash for, say, the 15-year anniversary, when at least there is something substantial to celebrate, i.e. that the marriage has lasted as long as it has? Think about it....

Read the whole story on CNN  Money at http://money.cnn.com/2011/08/29/pf/hurricane_impact_wedding/index.htm?hpt=hp_bn8

According to Yahoo, a 35-year-old California man was arrested for throwing his crying 7-year-old son into the water from a sightseeing cruise boat after first hitting the kid several times and threatening to throw the child overboard if he wouldn't stop crying. The man was on the boat with his girlfriend and his two sons from a previous marriage and appears to have been drinking before the incident.

Both the 7-year-old and his brother were returned to the care of their mother. The couple was married in 2002 and separated in 2006 after having two children. They divorced in 2007.

Family court filings showed the father lost his job in the mortgage industry in 2007 and got another job, but was injured and drew workers compensation. He successfully petitioned to get his child support obligation reduced and tried for a second reduction, which his ex-wife opposed.

The father had also pleaded guilty in February 2009 to being in contempt for not paying child support and was sentenced to three years of probation.

Guess what's going to happen to this guy who was brave enough to tough it out with a 7-year-old?

a) He's headed for jail. As he was still probably under probation from his 2009 sentence, I'm guessing he'll spend a cool 6 months minimum behind bars;

b) When he gets out, at most he'll get supervised visitation with his kids, perhaps two hours a month with child services looking on;

c) All the time he spends in jail he'll accumulate arrears in child support that he'll have to make good when he gets out;

d) Last on the list but most important, whatever relationship he had with the children before this incident, it will likely be severely and permanently scarred for the rest of his life.

Never, ever allow for violence into your life absent the imperative of self defense when life and limb are in peril. Always think of yourself as a civilized man where violence is not part of proving your manhood. Otherwise, the costs will be almost too much to bear.

Read the whole story on Yahoo at http://news.yahoo.com/calif-man-accused-throwing-son-off-cruise-boat-170614399.html

Historically, marriage has been "regulated" by religion: various Christian denominations had their specific rites and requirements, as did Jews, Muslims, Hindus, etc. If the Hindus allowed children to marry, the Christians didn't go up  in arms against it. If the Muslims contracted polygamous marriages, the Jews would shrug it off, and so forth. There were frictions at timesbut they mostly arose out of either conquest or proselytism, not in the daily lives of ordinary people.  

It was only with the monumental social upheaval brought about by the French revolution that government sought an interest in regulating marriage. The slaying of priests and the burning of Catholic churches in France at the end of the 18th century created a void of ecclesiastical authority which the French revolutionary government moved in to fill. As the church had been the pivotal center of the life of ordinary French citizens up to that point, the government sought for itself no lesser of a role, including the ceremonials and, more importantly, the legalization of the crucial events of family life - marriages, births and deaths.

Slowly but surely, governments all over the world moved into the realm of family life and started setting standards for contracting marriage. At first they were minimal: the minimum age of consent and/or the requirement of parental blessing, monogamous marriage, and dowry provisions. However, things were to get more complex quickly....