Minneapolis Divorce Attorney & Lawyer : Minnesota Family Law Firm : Brown Law Offices : St. Paul, Twin Cities MN Custody Child Support

When the dust settles from your divorce, you may find new problems on the horizon. As lawyers, we work very hard to draft a parenting time schedule that is concrete and detailed to avoid any ambiguity or need for interpretation. Inevitably, however, parenting conflicts arise. Enter the parenting consultant (or parenting time expeditor) if you and your ex can't resolve your dispute.

A parenting consultant is part mediator and part arbitrator. They can listen to parents and facilitate discussion, but also possess decision-making authority. Most are experienced family practitioners or child psychologists who work primarily in the area of parenting dispute resolution.

Parenting consultants offer the following benefits:

• Good decisions;
• Fast decisions; and
• Cheap decisions.

Most parties agree to employ a parenting consultant as part of their divorce decree and appreciate the ability to turn to someone with decision-making power with a simple phone call (try doing that with a judge) in the absence of ongoing legal fees. Most agree that the decision of the consultant is binding and may only be modified with an appeal to the court within 14 days from the decision. Parties typically split the cost of the consultant.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

Depending upon the facts and legal issues involved in your divorce, a number of experts may play a role in your case, including a home appraiser, actuary, custody evaluator, business appraiser and vocational assessor.

The most common expert we employ is a home appraiser. In most cases the most valuable asset for division is the marital homestead. If one party elects to remain in the homestead we must calculate the equity in the house to determine the value of the property settlement. Naturally, the first step to establishing equity involves the determination of the market value of the property.

A typical homestead appraisal costs around $350. They take approximately one (1) week to complete. Many clients ask if a realtor’s market analysis can substitute for an appraisal. If the parties agree, a market analysis is sufficient. However, a realtor’s market analysis does not hold the same evidentiary weight as a certified real estate appraisal. For that reason, the appraisal is usually preferred.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

The Minnesota Court of Appeals has opined that experts retained on a neutral basis by the parties to an action for dissolution of marriage are not entitled to quasi-judicial immunity (they are not immune from being sued for malpractice).

In Peterka v. Dennis, appellant sued respondents, an accountant and his employer, asserting that the accountant committed malpractice, for which his employer is vicariously liable, in evaluating businesses in connection with appellant’s dissolution action. Because the accountant was retained as an independent neutral evaluator of the businesses and a Hennepin County District Court Order required appellant and her husband to cooperate with and pay for the evaluation, respondents moved for summary judgment asserting quasi-judicial immunity. The district court granted summary judgment, holding that court appointment and public policy required that respondents be protected by quasi-judicial immunity. Because it concluded that respondent's accountant was not retained or appointed to perform a "judicial" function, the Minnesota Court of Appeals opted to reverse and remand.

The Court held that Dennis’ evaluation of business assets did not involve an "exercise of authority that is essentially judicial in nature." Dennis’ function was to apply sound accounting principles to develop factual bases supporting his expert opinion on the value of businesses in which appellant and her husband had an interest. Dennis had to exercise the same skill and judgment required by those in his profession; but exercise of that judgment did not equate to performing a judicial function. Dennis was retained, whether by appellant and her husband, or by the court, to give his expert opinion on the businesses’ value, not as a "decision-maker to determine competing claims" of appellant and her husband. For these reasons the Court concluded that even if Dennis was a court-appointed neutral, he was not appointed to perform a judicial function, and therefore is not entitled to quasi-judicial immunity. Because Dennis is not entitled to such immunity, Baune Dosen is therefore not entitled to vicarious quasi-judicial immunity.
 

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks