Wife in family law case viewed husband’s and his attorney’s emails for a yea
| cyan crackhouse ape | 07/19/25 | | swashbuckling painfully honest school cafeteria | 07/22/25 | | Cerebral Spruce Cruise Ship | 07/19/25 | | cyan crackhouse ape | 07/19/25 | | burgundy racy idea he suggested school | 07/19/25 | | Cerebral Spruce Cruise Ship | 07/19/25 | | cyan crackhouse ape | 07/19/25 | | cyan crackhouse ape | 07/19/25 | | Cerebral Spruce Cruise Ship | 07/19/25 | | bonkers lettuce theater | 07/21/25 | | Cerebral Spruce Cruise Ship | 07/21/25 | | Exhilarant impertinent keepsake machete | 07/22/25 | | tantric thriller telephone | 07/19/25 | | ruby office reading party | 07/19/25 | | Cerebral Spruce Cruise Ship | 07/19/25 | | ruby office reading party | 07/19/25 | | coiffed gay wizard library | 07/22/25 | | Trip pearl site masturbator | 07/19/25 | | fantasy-prone hissy fit genital piercing | 07/19/25 | | Trip pearl site masturbator | 07/19/25 | | Ivory hell | 07/19/25 | | cyan crackhouse ape | 07/19/25 | | Bronze Disrespectful Round Eye | 07/19/25 | | cyan crackhouse ape | 07/19/25 | | slap-happy turdskin locale | 07/20/25 | | coiffed gay wizard library | 07/22/25 | | Fragrant judgmental karate | 07/19/25 | | Self-absorbed nowag halford | 07/19/25 | | cyan crackhouse ape | 07/19/25 | | Cerebral Spruce Cruise Ship | 07/19/25 | | Titillating People Who Are Hurt | 07/19/25 | | Curious indecent parlour juggernaut | 07/19/25 | | Zippy Cerise Area | 07/19/25 | | cyan crackhouse ape | 07/19/25 | | Zippy Cerise Area | 07/19/25 | | cyan crackhouse ape | 07/20/25 | | Zippy Cerise Area | 07/20/25 | | cyan crackhouse ape | 07/20/25 | | Zippy Cerise Area | 07/20/25 | | cyan crackhouse ape | 07/20/25 | | Zippy Cerise Area | 07/20/25 | | cyan crackhouse ape | 07/20/25 | | Zippy Cerise Area | 07/20/25 | | cyan crackhouse ape | 07/20/25 | | Zippy Cerise Area | 07/20/25 | | cyan crackhouse ape | 07/20/25 | | Zippy Cerise Area | 07/20/25 | | cyan crackhouse ape | 07/20/25 | | slap-happy turdskin locale | 07/20/25 | | Zippy Cerise Area | 07/21/25 | | cyan crackhouse ape | 07/22/25 | | coiffed gay wizard library | 07/22/25 | | Hairraiser ebony parlor doctorate | 07/22/25 | | cyan crackhouse ape | 07/22/25 | | Hairraiser ebony parlor doctorate | 07/22/25 | | cyan crackhouse ape | 07/22/25 | | spectacular insecure hunting ground | 07/19/25 | | cyan crackhouse ape | 07/22/25 | | Fiercely-loyal bearded principal's office | 07/19/25 | | cyan crackhouse ape | 07/22/25 | | Hairraiser ebony parlor doctorate | 07/19/25 | | peach casino | 07/20/25 | | cyan crackhouse ape | 07/20/25 | | aquamarine exciting shitlib nursing home | 07/20/25 | | cyan crackhouse ape | 07/20/25 | | Zippy Cerise Area | 07/20/25 | | cyan crackhouse ape | 07/22/25 | | coiffed gay wizard library | 07/22/25 | | Cerebral Spruce Cruise Ship | 07/20/25 | | charcoal idiotic jewess | 07/22/25 | | Hairraiser ebony parlor doctorate | 07/22/25 | | Walnut fanboi | 07/22/25 | | Scarlet floppy meetinghouse | 07/22/25 | | cyan crackhouse ape | 07/22/25 | | coiffed gay wizard library | 07/22/25 | | Scarlet floppy meetinghouse | 07/22/25 | | coiffed gay wizard library | 07/22/25 | | cyan crackhouse ape | 07/22/25 | | coiffed gay wizard library | 07/22/25 | | bright wonderful national | 07/22/25 | | cyan crackhouse ape | 07/22/25 | | Scarlet floppy meetinghouse | 07/22/25 | | cyan crackhouse ape | 07/22/25 | | coiffed gay wizard library | 07/22/25 | | cyan crackhouse ape | 07/22/25 | | coiffed gay wizard library | 07/22/25 | | Scarlet floppy meetinghouse | 07/22/25 | | cyan crackhouse ape | 07/23/25 | | bright wonderful national | 07/22/25 | | coiffed gay wizard library | 07/22/25 | | cyan crackhouse ape | 07/22/25 | | coiffed gay wizard library | 07/22/25 | | cyan crackhouse ape | 07/22/25 | | coiffed gay wizard library | 07/22/25 | | cyan crackhouse ape | 07/22/25 | | coiffed gay wizard library | 07/22/25 |
Poast new message in this thread
Date: July 19th, 2025 10:14 AM Author: cyan crackhouse ape
Well, almost a year. She kept the family tablet after separation and my client was still logged into his google account. He would draft an email, not send it, and the next day his wife would address the issues in his draft email.
He didn’t want to sound paranoid so he didn’t say anything and then when he’s changing his password he took a screenshot showing the family tablet had accessed his Gmail 28 minutes ago.
I have been sitting on this information since the end of May because I was waiting until I could secure my client one overnight with his kids. Once we have that it will be difficult stopping our momentum towards 50/50 custody.
Now that our overnight is secure and we have a custody review hearing coming up at which point I’ll keep up pressure for an additional overnight, it was time to send my Evidence Preservation Letter.
Of course I sent that on a Friday. Just in case no one left the office early, I sent it in the morning. Why not ruin both a Friday morning and the weekend?
I gave them until Monday morning at 9:00 am to pick one of the two computer forensic experts I found, and turn over the tablet.
Opposing counsel’s office reached out hours later in the afternoon saying that the attorney was going to be in court all day Monday and they need time to talk to the wife, it will probably be early next week . . .
I said no.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5752282&forum_id=2).#49114091) |
Date: July 19th, 2025 10:16 AM Author: Cerebral Spruce Cruise Ship
I presume this violates the initial orders?
I also presume this is incredibly common?
What kind of sanctions will this result in and how mad will be the judge?
How does this help with custody? Just demonstrates that the mom is a lying cunt?
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5752282&forum_id=2).#49114093) |
 |
Date: July 19th, 2025 10:44 AM Author: cyan crackhouse ape
It doesn’t violate any initial family law orders or I would have filed for contempt and asked the judge to put her in jail.
Not a criminal lawmo but I believe it’s a violation of federal and state law. Invasion of privacy or something blah blah.
Not common. Extremely rare. Once I had a client snooping on his wife’s and attorney’s emails because wife was using her Microsoft email and it was under his account or something.
I sent him a CYA email telling him it’s a federal crime, I want nothing to do with it and to stop immediately, but other than that I don’t see this happening.
I’m asking for $10,000 in punitive sanctions plus attorney fees.
The judge will feign mild concern.
It might unintentionally result in my guy getting to 50/50 faster.
I actually had to have a Come to Jesus talk with my client telling him this was going to cost maybe $10-20k to see through with the most likely outcome being zero punishment for her.
It demonstrates more than just dishonesty. She breached her fiduciary duty for one. Violated her husband’s attorney client privilege. Breached the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing. You know, really bad shit like that.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5752282&forum_id=2).#49114133)
|
 |
Date: July 19th, 2025 10:53 AM Author: Cerebral Spruce Cruise Ship
LMFAO, oh what a profession!
I'm so glad my divorce was amicable (and I got bored of reading her texts and e-mails).
Btw, it MIGHT be a federal crime, but she'll claim she had implied permission for authorized access. Zero chance feds get involved in this fact pattern. Also if you and your client were sitting on your rights this may be the rare case of correctly arguing the doctrine of laches.
tyvmf that last paragraph. Starting my day with a good laff.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5752282&forum_id=2).#49114146) |
Date: July 19th, 2025 11:47 AM Author: Ivory hell
> He didn’t want to sound paranoid so he didn’t say anything and then when he’s changing his password he took a screenshot showing the family tablet had accessed his Gmail 28 minutes ago.
A mail app or the gmail app will simply check in to his account in the background, whether or not anyone else is looking at his emails.
Judge: "The only violation that I can see here is your client's poor opsec, Counselor."
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5752282&forum_id=2).#49114198) |
Date: July 19th, 2025 12:13 PM Author: Bronze Disrespectful Round Eye
Who cares?
This woman, who isn't a lawyer and has no ethical duty, is fighting for custody of her children - and people are mad she opened up emails that were beeping on a device in her living room in order to address the husband's concerns?
"Why can't I live with mommy"
"Because she technically violated the digital records act of 2002."
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5752282&forum_id=2).#49114219) |
 |
Date: July 19th, 2025 3:30 PM Author: Titillating People Who Are Hurt
what state? example?
"In Illinois, when a Petition for Dissolution of Marriage or Legal Separation or Declaration of Invalidity of Marriage is filed, and either party is served with the summons and petition or files an appearance, certain prohibitions automatically go into effect for both parties and their agents. This is often referred to as a "dissolution action stay" or automatic orders.
These orders generally prohibit physically abusing, harassing, intimidating, striking, or interfering with the personal liberty of the other party or their children, and concealing a minor child from the other parent. These automatic stays are in effect until a judgment is entered, the case is dismissed, or a further order from the court is issued. "
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5752282&forum_id=2).#49114598) |
 |
Date: July 20th, 2025 1:10 AM Author: cyan crackhouse ape
That’s not what happened. She got a restraining order, kicking him out of the house. The DVTRO was complete bullshit, I filed a competing one, and both are expiring (her TRO and my client’s request for one (a competing DVTRO is always denied per statute)) next month pursuant to stipulation.
He didn’t remember that he was still logged into his Google account on the family tablet. He had other things on his mind as he did not see the DVTRO coming, had to suddenly move in with his parents, couldn’t see his kids, etc.
Wife went into the family tablet and accessed his gmail account and read his emails with me from September through May. That’s a lot different from leaving an email open on your computer when someone walks by.
I revise my rating. Your hypo is 148.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5752282&forum_id=2).#49115712) |
 |
Date: July 20th, 2025 2:48 AM Author: cyan crackhouse ape
You sound confident, some might say pretentious, but I digress.
I’ve said at least TWICE NOW (I’m shouting because you are obviously hearing impaired), that I’m only seeking $10k in punitive sanctions and attorney fees and that custody isn’t an appropriate remedy.
I’m starting to lose patience with your pretentious ignorance. The burden of proof in family court is a preponderance. Are you sure you know what that means Mr. Super Lawyer?
I’m not asking what it means in whatever ivory fucking tower your fat tattooed ass is sitting in, but what it means in an actual courtroom and not in YouTube or TikTok comments.
I only need to prove by a preponderance that the bitch snooped. Once I do that her credibility is shot. She would lose any factual dispute regarding custody, any close calls will go against her so it creates something called “leverage”.
Not the kind of leverage you encounter on your HVAC job but the negotiating kind.
If you want to know more about family law you can just ask me. You don’t have to be an asshole unless that’s part of your shtick or something. Anyways, peace brother, it’s been fun.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5752282&forum_id=2).#49115773)
|
 |
Date: July 22nd, 2025 12:28 PM Author: cyan crackhouse ape
This is what DeepSeek thinks of you ITT:
He’s dangerously ignorant of family law. chilmata’s strategy (using the breach to undermine the wife’s credibility) is standard practice, and judges do penalize sneaky behavior in custody cases, even if no criminal charges stick.
Verdict: 80% troll, 20% clueless contrarian. Either way, not worth engaging seriously.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5752282&forum_id=2).#49121679) |
 |
Date: July 22nd, 2025 12:03 AM Author: Hairraiser ebony parlor doctorate
Hank, domestic court work is bowling w the gutter bumpers up. Of course you are right but he’ll make the point that wife was sneaky which may help his client later in some small degree.
Anyway, let chilmata be chilmata. He’s having fun and trust me he won’t hurt himself or his client with this motion. Motions like this don’t backfire in domestic relations court like they would in civil court. They won’t get any traction either but the judge politely refrains from asking movant or his counsel why they are such dumbasses as to leave the email readily accessible in the first place, or the deeper questions about whether the privilege was waived by chilmata assuming he didn’t previously counsel client specifically to change his email access on all devices.
Practicing law in domestic court is less law and more just plain social work and what judge wants to beat up on a poor abused “social worker” who has to take shit from hysterical clients all day every day.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5752282&forum_id=2).#49120514) |
Date: July 19th, 2025 9:44 PM Author: Hairraiser ebony parlor doctorate
OP has good reasoning here for the big picture. The snooping wife scenario happens often and isn’t such a big deal as OP’s tech incompetent client thinks it is, but it’s a good chance to lay the groundwork for the larger goal regardless.
Edit: would add that this situation would make me add a warning slip to my intake packet and have future clients sign it to acknowledge i told them to change their email access codes and not to use a shared line.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5752282&forum_id=2).#49115401) |
Date: July 22nd, 2025 12:05 AM Author: Scarlet floppy meetinghouse
180.
I used to love those moments. I’ve lost my fire and can’t muster the energy to care about most of my cases.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5752282&forum_id=2).#49120516) |
 |
Date: July 22nd, 2025 2:17 PM Author: Scarlet floppy meetinghouse
I like trying DV cases. It would be great to have a whole practice devoted to it, but i don't think the volume is there.
I hate dealing with custody in general to be honest. It's extremely important because it impacts the lives of kids who usually have no say in in any of it. I just don't want to be the one to deal with those issues anymore. It's stressful and emotional. I agree there definitely are the gatekeeper moms who alienate kids, but I also think there's plenty of shitty dads who'd rather blame their ex-wives for their bad relationships with their kids than take responsibility.
I'd much rather fight about financial issues than kid issues.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5752282&forum_id=2).#49122075) |
 |
Date: July 22nd, 2025 2:25 PM Author: cyan crackhouse ape
Yeah, shitty dads suck too, but I find the gatekeeping mom to be a bigger problem in family law. They are the fucking worst.
Maybe the DV process isn't as abused there as it is here.
The problem in California is the "3044 presumptions" which refers to Family Code section 3044.
When a judge makes a finding of domestic violence it creates a "presumption" that the perp is an "unfit parent" and unfit parents cannot have legal or physical custody of their kids until they "rebut" the presumption.
That means they have to be supervised with their kids.
Right now we are setting DV trial in Spring/Summer 2026.
So when mom files a DVTRO against dad, if it is granted (95%) then dad will be restrained and supervised with his kids until trial.
If dad loses trial THEN the 3044 presumptions kick in and it usually takes 4-6 months to rebut the presumption of parental unfitness.
How do they rebut the presumption? Take a DV class, take a parenting class, show the judge the certificates and pretend you learned something.
It is the 3044 presumptions that lead to all this DVTRO abuse. Its bad.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5752282&forum_id=2).#49122106) |
Date: July 22nd, 2025 12:41 PM Author: coiffed gay wizard library
you should do some "women are 180" megathread. i love reading your shit.
is this woman contesting 50/50 purely out lf spite? how often does this happen? any common threads you've noticed in bitter scorched earth shrews you've noticed that men should consider a red flag?
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5752282&forum_id=2).#49121723) |
 |
Date: July 22nd, 2025 1:41 PM Author: cyan crackhouse ape
I've noticed that women tend to have control issues. It isn't that they deny 50/50 custody out of spite; they don't like giving up control.
A lot of women actually do take on the primary caregiver role even when both parents are employed and I'm sure it feels unfair to share custody equally when the mom was doing the majority of the child raising prior to separation.
One particular pattern I noticed is that when the mother cheats on the father, she will go WWIII scorched-earth, file DVTRO, make up false allegations with the ultimate nuclear bomb being sexual abuse allegations against a child.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5752282&forum_id=2).#49121945) |
|
|