We represented a wife in a domestic violence restraining order filed by her husband. The husband claimed that he was the victim and that our client was the aggressor in the incident. Our client claimed the opposite. We decided to file a cross restraining order against our client's husband. Once our client's husband received a copy of the restraining order against him, he decided to drop his restraining order against our client. Read On
We successfully resolved a parentage case involving paternity, child custody, child visitation, child support, attorney's fees and costs, and other important issues. Our client will get sole physical custody, sole legal custody, above guideline child support, $25,000 in retroactive child support, and $5,000 in attorney's fees and costs. The opposing party will be getting supervised visitation and must attend court-approved parenting classes. Read On
We represented a client who purchased a pet dog while living with their significant other. Our client was the primary caregiver of the pet dog during their relationship and after the relationship ended. Several months later, our client's significant other retained an attorney and claimed ownership of the pet dog. After we reviewed the pertinent legal documents, we discovered that both parties were named as the Buyers on the Bill of Sale Agreement, and both parties contributed monetarily to the purchase of the pet dog. As a result, they were both legally entitled to the pet dog. We were able to negotiate a buyout, which gave our client 100% ownership of the pet dog, and the opposing party a temporary visitation schedule. Read On
We represented a father in a child custody and visitation dispute. The father was moving to another city in the Bay Area and he needed to adjust the current co-parenting plan. In addition, the father wanted to modify the summer vacation schedule. Due to the different parenting philosophies of the parents, there was a dispute between the father and the mother of what was in the best interests of the children. After a lengthy negotiation, we were able to successfully resolve the dispute outside of court and file a Stipulation and Order, which was approved by the judge. Read On
We represented a mother who previously used a legal document preparation service to request custody orders of her two minor children in a DVRO proceeding against her ex-boyfriend. The paperwork was unfortunately not properly prepared and the custody orders were denied, which the mother believed put the welfare and safety of her children at risk. The Geller Firm was then retained and we filed a separate request for Temporary Emergency (Ex Parte) Orders, which were granted by the judge. The children are now safe with their mother. Read On
Our client was the father of a child who lived in the State of Nevada for the past 5 years. Although there has been no formal child custody order between the father and the mother, the father has been the primary caregiver of the child in the State of Nevada while the mother has had occasional visitation in the State of California. At the conclusion of a one week visitation, the mother refused to return the child to their home and filed for joint physical and legal custody in the State of California. Based on the facts, we concluded that this legal action was improper because the State of Nevada should have jurisdiction over this case Under the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act (UCCJEA). We worked with a law firm in the State of Nevada to get an emergency court order to return the child to the father, contacted the local police department to enforce the court order, and dismissed the mother's petition because the State of California does not have jurisdiction over this matter. Read On
Our client was the Respondent in a child custody and visitation case where the Petitioner was attempting to get full physical and legal custody of the minor child with no visitation to our client until an emergency screening was conducted. We filed a responsive declaration, attempted to settle the matter with the Petitioner, and prepared for the hearing. At the hearing, the Court granted our proposed order with no changes to the current custody and visitation schedule. Read On
The Geller Firm was able to get another Domestic Violence Restraining Order dismissed in Alameda County. Additional details cannot be disclosed due to another pending matter between the parties in family court. Read On
After 5 months in a court battle over pet custody, our client was awarded her beautiful dog. Additional details cannot be disclosed due to a pending criminal court case. Read On
Details of this case cannot be disclosed due to ongoing litigation on other issues. Read On
Our client was the Respondent in a domestic violence restraining order case in Solano County where he was not allowed to contact the mother of his child or see his new born son. After our investigation, we believed that there was no violence and no credible threat of violence. We filed a response to the allegations and prepared a mitigation package for the hearing. Despite a very emotionally draining process, we were able to come to an agreement with the Petitioner and have the hearing vacated. Read On
Our client needed protection from her mother, but she did not want to get her mother in legal trouble. We first filed a Request for Temporary Restraining Order, which was granted by the judge in the County of San Francisco. Then we negotiated a private agreement with the opposing party's counsel that accomplished the goals of our client. Read On
A petitioner filed a Request for Order to modify child custody against our client in Solano County. After reviewing the petitioner's declaration and conducting our own investigation into the matter, we concluded that it was not in the best interests of the child for child custody to be modified. We filed a responsive declaration and prepared our client for the scheduled hearing. At the hearing, the judge denied the petitioner's Request for Order to modify child custody. Read On
A domestic violence restraining order was filed against our client in San Francisco Unified Family Court. After our investigation, there was reason to believe that the restraining order was filed as leverage for financial gain in the course of a marriage dissolution. We filed a response to the domestic violence restraining order, negotiated a non-CLETS peaceful contact agreement with the petitioner, and the case was dismissed at the hearing. Read On
50 California Street, Suite 1500
San Francisco, CA 94111
415-840-0570
2950 Buskirk Avenue, Suite 300
Walnut Creek, CA 94597
415-840-0570
By Appointment Only.