In the News

Posted on by

Below is a roundup of Blank Rome Matrimonial and Family Law Partners’ recent awards, recognitions, media, and other accomplishments from around the country.


Second Season of “Stacy Phillips & Friends” Launched
November 18, 2025 – Blank Rome partner Stacy D. Phillips has launched the second season of her lifestyle podcast “Stacy Phillips & Friends.” This podcast engages in insightful conversations with remarkable businesswomen, philanthropists, entrepreneurs, and industry leaders, inspiring and empowering women to transform their lives and careers

Letters to Let Go: The Healing Power of Expressive Writing
November 13, 2025 – Blank Rome partner Lois J. Liberman’s Look Ahead series is designed to bring our community together to help tackle today’s most complex relationship and divorce issues.

This Celebrity Attorney’s Client List Is Getting Younger—but There Is One Thing She Says Gen Z Is Doing Right in Relationships
October 30, 2025 – Blank Rome partner Jackie Combs was featured in this CNBC article discussing the importance of communication within relationships.

‘Real Housewives’ Divorce Bombshell — Bravo Star Could Be ‘Individually Charged and Prosecuted in Criminal Court’ If She Walks Away from Marriage
October 29, 2025 – Blank Rome partner Ernestine J. Mings was featured in this Radar Online article discussing potential criminal charges surrounding Real Housewives star Wendy Osefo’s divorce. 

Cardi B’s Divorce: Money Moves and Legal Lessons
October 28, 2025 – Blank Rome partner Morgan F. Mouchette authored this Forbes article discussing complications surrounding rap music star Cardi B’s divorce

Continue reading →

Divorce Law and Civil Procedure: The Dynamic Duo

Posted on by

Alan R. Feigenbaum ●

New York Law Journal, December 11, 2025 —

For the lawyers out there, when you graduated law school, did you know what the terms “with prejudice” or “without prejudice” meant? I did not.

I do recall reading cases on “res judicata” and “collateral estoppel” in Civil Procedure class; however, both concepts were taught in such an amorphous manner it was hard to understand what they meant, in practice.

The Honorable Aaron D. Maslow’s recent decision in M.H. v. S.A., 2025 NY Slip Op 51713(U) (Sup. Ct., Kings Cty. 2025) explains all of these concepts in a manner that provides clarity. The decision also addresses New York City’s Gender-Motivated Violence Act (GMVA), which to my mind is relevant to the practice of divorce law.

In M.H., the parties started a romantic relationship in 2008. They began living together in 2010 and registered as domestic partners. They share one child born in 2013.

The plaintiff-mother alleged that the defendant-father engaged in “escalating controlling and abusive behavior” including “yelling, blocking her movements, and physically restraining her.” In one instance, the mother alleged that the father “screamed at her until she lost consciousness” and that he “monitored her communications” and “accused her of ‘whoring around’ when she was with her male friends.”

After their child was born, the parties relocated from New York to Massachusetts where they both worked for MIT. There, the mother alleged that the father “controlled their joint finances, threatened her about losing her job, and later defunded her position.”

The decision recounts several other alleged incidents of abuse, in multiple states, including one incident where the father allegedly “dragged their child by the hood of a jacket” in March 2016, followed by pushing the mother onto a bed and choking her in December 2016, and then another incident in June 2018 when the father allegedly confronted the mother “about a custody agreement and physically restrained her when she refused to sign it.”

Read more on our website.

Attorney Spotlight: Bret Hunter—Los Angeles

Posted on by

Stacy D. Phillips ●

In this edition of Attorney Spotlight, I am pleased to feature one of our esteemed Los Angeles colleagues in Blank Rome’s Matrimonial & Family Law group—Bret Hunter.

With over two decades of legal experience, Bret is a trusted and integral member of our Matrimonial & Family Law team. A graduate of the University of Michigan and the Dedman School of Law at Southern Methodist University, Bret has successfully represented clients in numerous high-stakes cases involving substantial marital assets. His expertise, commitment, and in-depth knowledge of family law make him exceptionally qualified to navigate even the most challenging legal matters.

Prior to practicing law, Bret was active in the Washington, D.C., political arena. He caught the political bug early, working at a young age in various internships on Capitol Hill. After attending law school, Bret continued to work in the D.C. area in politics before deciding to begin a full-time career as a lawyer. Family law offered him the opportunity to work closely with people, much like he did during his time on the Hill. Bret eventually moved to California, where he continues to practice law to this day.

Read more on our website.

Turning the Page: Reinvent Your Life with Meaningful Activities

Posted on by

Stacy D. Phillips ●

Marriages can certainly come to an end. It does not have to be the end of our journeys. Change can often be unwelcome, uncomfortable, or even frightening. Nevertheless, there is opportunity for positive change. If, after a divorce, we find ourselves alone, with less of what we once knew, indeed even with more time on our hands, it is more than possible to take this opportunity to indulge in life in ways that do not involve spouses or relationships, and that life is now granting us time to indulge in any multitude of interests or hobbies.

The mind can be one’s greatest enemy. Nothing can break us faster than that which stresses the mind out, sometimes even to the point of obsession. Obsessing is bad, and we all need balance. Now is the perfect time to let go of what you can’t control and protect your peace. Of course, that is easier said than done. Naturally, we are not ever islands in life; we may still have children to raise or jobs to do. Yet, even with responsibilities, exploring new hobbies after a divorce can be a powerful way to shift focus and rediscover joy. 

Indulging in the Mind

As a lawyer, I have written extensively, primarily in the context of my family law practice. But our ability to write can be so much more than a professional skill; it can become a creative outlet. Do you like stories? Is it a stretch to imply you may have a story of your own to write? This could be a fictional tale or a memoir; the genres are near limitless. Whichever the case, spending time writing your ideas and stories can be deeply fulfilling, and who knows? Your story could even be shared with the rest of the world.

Read more on our website.

Direct and Cross Examination in Divorce Proceedings

Posted on by

Alan R. Feigenbaum ●

New York Law Journal, November 25, 2025 —

As a divorce lawyer, sometimes the effort to find a continuing legal education (CLE) program that will expand your intellectual horizon in a way that can be beneficial to your actual divorce practice can feel daunting. There is no shortage of programs available. However, to create a program that is educational and practical is no small task.

Which is why it is so refreshing when a decision of interest is released in the matrimonial arena that, to a large degree, has all the bells, whistles, and other intangible “it” factors that make for a memorable CLE program.

That brings us to the Honorable Jeffrey S. Sunshine’s recent decision in T.I. v. R.I., 2025 NY Slip OP 51575 (U), which is to my mind a primer on the meaning of the following objection often heard at matrimonial and other trials when a witness is being cross-examined, namely, “Objection. Beyond the scope of direct examination.”

Let me start by saying that the subject matter of the case itself is serious in nature. While this article will focus on trial practice, it should be noted that T.I. is, sadly, a particularly arduous matter. The first divorce action—“extremely contentious litigation”—ended via discontinuance after a purported reconciliation. In the second (current) action for divorce, the plaintiff-wife filed an order to show cause seeking a civil order of protection against the defendant-husband.

In her motion, the wife detailed “numerous incidents of allegations of domestic violence and asserted that ‘[d]efendant also subjected me to sexual abuse, coercive control, financial abuse, and verbal abuse and harassment on an ongoing basis’.” The decision notes that “there is no specific allegation to rape in plaintiff’s affidavit in support of her application or to any allegations related to any December 2019 incident which is the subject of the pending criminal action against defendant-father.”

Read more on our website.

The Perils of Drafting Divorce Agreements: Part Deux

Posted on by

Alan R. Feigenbaum ●

New York Law Journal, October 23, 2025 —

There are certain provisions that divorce lawyers regularly utilize when drafting separation agreements. Some of those provisions concern topics such as the distribution of marital assets, spousal maintenance, child support, and/or counsel fees. Drafting such provisions can become routine, but glossing over them is not advisable.

One such provision is regularly found in the “Article” of a separation agreement titled “Emancipation Events,” (i.e., an event upon which the noncustodial parent’s obligation to pay child support may terminate). The emancipation event that I will focus on in this article is often defined as a child having a permanent residence away from the custodial parent (the child support payee).

If, at the time a separation agreement is signed, Mom is the custodial parent and Dad is the noncustodial parent, you will likely see this enumerated emancipation event: permanent residence away from the residence of the Mother.

That all seems quite straightforward—at least I thought it was until I read E.B. v. A.F., 2025 NY Slip Op 51286(U) (Family Court, Nassau Cty. 2025). In E.B., the parties married in 2010, and entered into a separation agreement and divorced in 2019. The two children of the marriage are ages 14 and 11 according to the decision.

The parties’ separation agreement designated the Mother as the residential custodial parent and the Father was required to pay basic child support. Section XI of the separation agreement, titled “Emancipation of the Children” defined “Emancipation” to include “permanent residence away from the residence of the Wife.”

However, in 2024, the Father was granted temporary custody of the children; the Father also petitioned to suspend his child support payments due to the change in residential custody. The Father prevailed: he was granted residential custody and his basic child support obligations were terminated.

Read more on our website.

Unnecessarily Prolonging Divorce Litigation May Cost You Dearly

Posted on by

Alan R. Feigenbaum ●

New York Law Journal, September 25, 2025 —

As a matrimonial lawyer, we have all experienced the client who asks us weekly, if not daily, why we cannot effectively find a way to compel his or her spouse to settle what the client believes (and perhaps you, as the lawyer believe) is a straightforward case.

The answer to that question remains the same: in New York, divorcing spouses have an absolute right to a trial, and they are not required to settle. This is, of course, not the answer that the client who is looking to exit the process wants to hear, but it is, nonetheless, the answer.

Divorcing spouses have differing views on what constitutes unreasonable or obstructive conduct. Sometimes, one spouse will make a settlement proposal and, if the other spouse so much as hints at disagreeing with any of it, the offering spouse will declare the other spouse “unreasonable.” We can debate what it means to be “unreasonable” for the rest of time.

For now, let us examine the consequences to the divorcing spouse who intentionally blocks any path to a settlement, whether due to (a) underlying psychological disorder, (b) a refusal to share ordinary course financial information that is otherwise discoverable in a matrimonial action, and/or (c) the assertion of positions that the opposing spouse and his/her lawyer would never in good faith accept because those positions, at best, have no basis in law or fact.

Is there any consequence, or are there any consequences, to that type of divorcing spouse, even though you cannot compel that same spouse to settle? The answer is yes, and that brings us to the Appellate Division, Third Department’s recent decision in Marshak v. Marshak, 2025 NY Slip Op 04281.

Read more on our website.

Mandatory Parent Education: Hope for New York Families

Posted on by

Alan R. Feigenbaum ●

New York Law Journal, September 4, 2025 —

It is no secret to New York’s family law bar that divorce and separation stress can trigger lasting trauma in young children, teens, adult children, and their parents, and can reshape young and adult brains and emotional health.

If you were to poll the matrimonial bar and take their temperature on questions such as: Is the AFC (attorneys for children) structure working for families in contested custody cases (why or why not)?; Is the parent coordinator dynamic working for families in contested custody cases (why or why not)?; and/or is the appointment of forensic psychologists or related mental health professionals in contested custody cases bringing families closer to resolution or farther from resolution?; we suspect the answers would run the gamut.

To be sure, there are AFCs, parent coordinators, family therapists, and forensic psychiatrists that have done and are doing upstanding work for New York’s families in distress. But we cannot ignore that, as with almost anything in the legal profession, there is always room for improvement.

With that in mind, the State legislature has a chance to ameliorate the negative impacts of parental breakup with a remedy justified by science and decades of research and experience: mandatory parent education in disputed custody cases.

A new bill, filed this year in the State Assembly, would mandate that parents involved in contested custody matters be required to attend a state-approved parent education program as part of the processing of their matter through the Supreme and Family courts.

Read more on our website.

Constructive Emancipation in Divorce: A Steep Evidentiary Burden

Posted on by

Alan R. Feigenbaum ●

New York Law Journal, August 21, 2025 —

One of the most glaring contradictions in the practice of matrimonial law is that divorce litigation proceeds all the way up through the start of a trial without being governed by the rules of evidence. But when a trial starts, perhaps years after the divorce action has been commenced, all of a sudden the rules of evidence are front and center.

The danger posed by this contradiction should be obvious: an attorney can prosecute an argument or arguments for the better part of 80 to 90 percent of the duration of a divorce litigation without concern for questions such as (1) is this hearsay, and if so, is there a hearsay exception that applies; (2) is this document authenticated; (3) can I get this document in evidence even though its author is no longer alive; (4) is this a business record, and many more.

But when trial starts, the unchained litigious arguments that an attorney can make in motion papers and at oral argument on motions without evidentiary restriction are met with a gigantic brick wall, and that attorney had better be ready with concrete evidence.

That brings us to the subject of constructive emancipation of children in divorce, which to my mind incorporates one of the most challenging and complex burdens of proof in the scheme of the many claims that can be made in the context of divorce litigation.

In the recent decision of L.E. v. Y.E., 2025 NY Slip Op 51038(U) (Family Court, Westchester County, May 2025), the petitioner-father sought to discontinue his child support obligations for his three children on the basis that they had been constructively emancipated. Prior to the father’s modification petition, the mother had been awarded sole legal and physical custody, with the father having “supervised and/or unsupervised access” with the children.

The father ceased paying all support in 2023, and alleged that “despite his efforts, the children have refused to see him for six years, and by their choice and not his actions, and as a result, are constructively emancipated.”

Read more on our website.

In the News

Posted on by

Below is a roundup of Blank Rome Matrimonial and Family Law Partners’ recent awards, recognitions, media coverage, and other accomplishments from around the country.

‘Meaningful Consultation’ Over Add-On Expenses in Divorce
July 24, 2025 – Blank Rome partner Alan R. Feigenbaum authored this New York Law Journal article discussing “add-on expenses” within custody agreements. 

Chambers High Net Worth 2025 Highly Ranks Blank Rome Matrimonial & Family Law Group and Attorneys
July 24, 2025 – Chambers High Net Worth 2025 has highly ranked Blank Rome’s Matrimonial & Family Law practice group in California and New York, as well as co-chairs Kristina Royce and Morgan Fraser Mouchette, and partners Marilyn B. Chinitz, Norman S. Heller, Lois J. Liberman, Sophie Jacobi-Parisi, Stacy D. Phillips, Mary T. Vidas, and Brett S. Ward. 

Stacy D. Phillips and Kristina Royce Recognized as Leading California Family, Matrimonial & Divorce Lawyers by Doyle’s Guide
July 23, 2025 – Blank Rome is pleased to share that partners Stacy D. Phillips and Kristina Royce have been recognized in the 2025 listing of Leading California Family, Matrimonial & Divorce Lawyers by Doyle’s Guide.

Here’s How Much Andy Byron’s Divorce Bill Could Be Following Coldplay Kiss Cam Debacle
July 19, 2025 – Blank Rome partner Jacqueline Combs was featured in this New York Post article discussing the potential fallout from Andy Byron’s recent incident at Coldplay’s concert.

Continue reading →