NJ Family Legal Blog : New Jersey Divorce and Family Lawyer & Attorney : Fox Rothschild Law Firm : Domestic Violence, Prenuptial Agreements, Child Custody

We have previously blogged about domestic violence in the digital age, discussing how various forms of electronic surveillance can be deemed an act of domestic violence in New Jersey.  As also previously blogged on, so-called "cyberstalkers" may potentially face stiffer penalties for their conduct under two proposed bills in the New Jersey Assembly.  These types of remedies and protection are becoming more and more necessary as people are utilizing new technologies to abuse their victims.

In S.B. v. Duffy, a new unreported (not precedential) decision from the Appellate Division, it affirmed a trial court's finding that a former boyfriend had committed an act of domestic violence by emailing the plaintiff and threatening her that if she did not answer his email within three days, he would, among other things, put nude photos of her on a website.  The plaintiff testified that after a first court adjournment, she continued to receive emails from the boyfriend and that the boyfriend was posting things about her on his website.  She also testified that the boyfriend had changed his password and that she could not access the website to see what he was posting. 

Despite the boyfriend's testimony that the plaintiff had full access to his website, that it was her who was disrupting the site, and that he did not write the emails to her, the trial court entered a final restraining order in part because of the photographs in existence, which were taken in a private setting during the relationship.  The court actually disregarded the emails because there was no proof as to who wrote them without expert testimony.

As this case demonstrates, with rapid changes in technology courts are faced with new types of misconduct upon which determinations as to domestic violence are required. 

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks

 Penalties and new obligations for cyber stalkers are the subject of two bills in the New Jersey Assembly which  have been given renewed interest recently. At present, a stalking victim is entitled to a restraining order limiting contact to the victim from the stalker. Under Assembly Bill A-2143, the contact that the convicted stalker prohibited from making would include e-mails via the internet. This is to afford the victim an additional layer of protection against his or her abuser. In a related, bill, A-3348, an individual who is convicted of stalking would be required to provide the appropriate law enforcement agency with his or her e-mail address or username, along with any appropriate password. In the even that the individual fails to do so, they would be guilty of a fourth degree crime which is punishable by a term of imprisonment of up to 18 months and a fine of up to $10,000.

These two bills demonstrate the acknowledgement that electronic communications are no longer on the fringe of interaction and have become methods which are used (and abused) by individuals daily. To the extent that a individual stalks another, electronic communications are often a weapon of choice. These bills would attempt to close a loophole that currently exists in the law as it is currently written.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

When I have an initial interview with a client, one of the common questions that comes up is, “how should I get in touch with you?” Because I am at times up and working early in the morning, or out of the office in court during the day and catching up at night, a common response is, “e-mail.” As we continue to move into the age of technology; when our President has a Blackberry, e-mail is increasingly supplementing phone calls as a way for me to communicate with clients.

Yet there are a couple of important things that have to be considered when communicating electronically with a lawyer. I had previously discussed some of these issues in a previous blog. For instance, it is important to remember that AOL, and other non-web based e-mail servers may place copies of your sent and received e-mails directly onto your hard drive. Therefore, any person in the household who has access to your computer also may also have access to that you may have believed were confidential communications to your attorney. Thus, I always suggest that client’s use a web-based e-mail such as yahoo, gmail or hotmail.

Another issue that comes up is the fact that many clients utilize their work computers and e-mail address to communicate with their legal counsel. A unreported non-matrimonial case was recently decided, Stengart v. Loving Care Agency, in which an employee had used her company issued laptop to e-mail her lawyer. Even though she utilized her web-based e-mail address, a temporary file was still stored on the hard drive. Thus, the court found that the employee had waived the attorney client privilege when she used the company’s hardware. Important in that case was the fact that the employee handbook specifically provided that e-mail messages were part of the company’s business records. Also in this particular case, the employee had used the company lap top to communicate with her lawyer about the terms of her resignation from the company.

Notwithstanding the particular facts of this case, it is surely the tip of the iceberg floating our way. This is an area of the law in which the technology is moving faster than we can respond. It is imperative that you know what files will be stored on the hard drive of the computer that you are using when conveying information to your lawyer. The lesson to be learned here is that when you have critical confidential information to get to your lawyer, pick up the phone and give me a call.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks