I requested a hearing to lift supervision because 9 months of supervision is insane so I convinced the judge to give me this hearing last Monday. It was a Hail Mary but you know the famous Gretzky quote about missing shots….

Mother and her attorney are particularly evil. I worked with mothers attorney at my last firm and didn’t like her precisely because I noticed she likes representing moms that try to alienate the dads from their kids.

This is our first case against each other.

At the hearing, mother introduced photos of the autistic daughter with self inflicted injuries she testified occurred immediately after a supervised visit with dad.

There was a photo of a head injury from the girl banging her head against the wall, two bite mark photos and photos of her hiding under the bed.

I lost the hearing, judge left supervision because the DV allegations are so “egregious” (all hearsay allegations like he threatened to kill mom and bury her in the backyard) and then set a hearing in July to hear from therapeutic providers regarding the girl’s injuries and whether they related to the supervised visits.

I get back to the office and notice the photos of the girl hiding are all around 9 pm because mothers watch is intentionally in every photo and her watch is in military time.

So I email mom’s lawyer asking informally for the metadata from the photos.

The next day I get them and I’m shocked they voluntarily gave them to me.

They didn’t give me the metadata line I asked but instead sent me the photos with date and time stamps on them:

The photo of the head injury is from 2023. Supervised visits started in 2025.

The one bite mark photo was taken 24 hours after a visit, the other was five days after a visit.

The hiding photos were more than four hours after a visit and during the girl’s bedtime.

On Tuesday, I’m going ex parte. It’s already drafted. This will be fun.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5729713&forum_id=2:#48960067)

The standard is grave and irreparable injury so my argument is that mom is alienating the girls from their father based on lies.

Now that I can show mom lied under oath at this hearing, her credibility for DV trial in September is shattered so at the very least I can use this to prevail at trial which is the most important goal.

If I win the DV trial, then the judge will most likely hold that mother’s voluntarily leave was unreasonable and retroactively modify child support back to December using mom’s non-leave income which is double dad’s. Her leave income is —surprise!— the same as dad’s.

Mom makes $17k a month normally but only $8k a month while on leave.

If dad got 50/50 custody out of the gate, she would be paying him $3k a month.

So by making false DV allegations, she gets 100% custody, dad gets 4 hours of supervised visitation and he has to pay her $2000 a month in support on $4500 net income a month.

Also, the DVTRO precludes dad from getting any spousal support.

So not only did this rancid fucking cunt lie about the underlying DV allegations back in December to set this all up, but she just weaponized her daughter’s autism to keep her boot on my client’s throat.

At the hearing I asked mom if she denied her daughters love their father and she struggled to answer.

I asked her, “How long should dad be supervised for? Forever?” and she said yes lol. She walked right into that one.

So even if this ex parte doesn’t result in the unsupervised 50/50 custody I’m asking for as relief, I’m also seeking sanctions and the complete destruction of mom’s credibility for trial in September.

Mom’s attorney’s reputation should take a nice hit too.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5729713&forum_id=2:#48960081)

Family court, my brother, is a court of equity. You can’t ever forget that.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5729713&forum_id=2:#48960098)

What does the dad do to pull 4500 holy shit that's low

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5729713&forum_id=2:#48960100)

it's insane how many high paid prole nurses are running around. I think they might be near solely responsible for top 5% incomes becoming so much more stratified in the last 15 years

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5729713&forum_id=2:#48960179)

but I don't know how people can do family law and deal with this level of personal viciousness every day

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5729713&forum_id=2:#48960087)

My son's mother is pathologically incapable of a peaceful interaction (she copped 7 criminal charges in 3 years, among them beating up an 80 year old man), and she tried to permanently wreck my relationship with my son, including alleging that I had roughed him up as an infant, incredibly.

Chilmata had the whole DV dismissed in under 3 weeks and it cost literally 1/5 what my previous lawyer charged. Just by getting her to be reasonable, which no one else in her entire life has ever done.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5729713&forum_id=2:#48960097)

If you represent the payee, support hearings are fine, but if you represent the payor they suck balls because literally every client says they can’t afford the court order. When you represent mainly dads you normally represent the payor.

Divorces usually do discovery and I fucking hate discovery more than anything. Holy shit I hate it and I hate having to grovel for an extension because my client is procrastinating.

Reviewing credit card and bank statements are the worst.

On the other hand, DV trials are fun as fuck because your entire goal is to prove she’s a lying whore. And when you do that it’s a huge dopamine rush. The best.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5729713&forum_id=2:#48960120)

Why are women so evil? What makes them so vindictive and willing to lie? Are they all 180?

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5729713&forum_id=2:#48960121)

But in custody cases I think they believe they deserve more custody simply because they carried to term.

It’s difficult to stereotype because I’ve seen everyone along the entire spectrum. There are shit dads and shit moms. Good dads and good moms. A good mom and a shit dad. A good dad and a shit mom.

But then let’s throw in some infidelity, mental illness, substance abuse, domestic violence….

Ok there are some drunk dudes outside my garage I need to investigate

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5729713&forum_id=2:#48960135)

In most families—even in 2025—the mother still carries much of the hands-on childcare. Losing “mom time” feels like losing half her soul. And since custody often dictates who pays support versus who receives it, the financial stakes double. A father who cheats and then asks for custody might face a cold reception (and a fresh support check) and so often quietly settles rather than go nuclear. A mother, however, risks both her bond and her income.

🔍 In Texas, adultery doesn’t legally decide custody, but it does make one spouse far less willing to compromise—and once litigation starts on moral grounds, the cost and conflict tend to explode.

2. Shame-aggression: when guilt goes ballistic

Infidelity isn’t just a legal “oops,” it’s an identity earthquake—especially for women, who still face harsher social scorn for “stepping out.” Psychologists call this the shame-aggression cycle: when your moral self-image shatters, you lash out to protect it. The result? Projection, blame-shifting, scorched-earth tactics.

🔍 Courts see that once “the A-bomb” of adultery is dropped on the official pleadings, everyone locks into adversarial mode—raising emotional toxicity and legal fees, with little gain in the end.

3. Lawyer strategy: your hammer becomes every problem

Attorneys are craftsmen of leverage. If a mother’s affair has turned local gossip into a branding furnace, her lawyer’s job is to rebuild her fortress. That often means refusing to negotiate, demanding full custody, or firing off aggressive motions—anything to shift the spotlight away from her conduct and onto the other parent’s “fitness.” Fathers who cheat rarely face that kind of collateral damage, so their lawyers don’t need quite so many weapons.

🔍 Family-law blogs note: once “paramour risk” or “moral fault” enters the mix, safeguarding the kids can ironically prolong the fight—each side digging in for fear of looking weak.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5729713&forum_id=2:#48961088)

I’ll take a criminal case once a blue moon as a favor to a family law client.

I actually just agreed to do one next week and I’m going to bill him hourly, I just revised his family law retainer to do it, but my specialty is restraining orders and child custody. I hate doing divorces. And I only like representing dads.

I represent a couple of moms but most of them are cool and aren’t trying to alienate the kids. A couple of them have slipped through the cracks so I try to reason with them and a few have fired me because I pressured them to settle and they didn’t like my advice.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5729713&forum_id=2:#48960109)

chilmata@gmail.com

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5729713&forum_id=2:#48965980)