More than anything, I'm known for spending a majority of my time in court. After all these years, I'm very comfortable in the courtroom - and when necessary, it serves my clients well. Three or four court days every week is a fairly normal pace for me.

We have very good people in our matrimonial group, and throughout our firm. We focus on our area of expertise - there is a big difference between being a divorce lawyer and being a lawyer who practices some divorce law. We don't have the latter.

Matrimonial law has only grown more challenging and more complex. There are new layers of complexity - new technologies, new precedents - with every case we take on. Today, it's illegal to surreptitiously videotape another person. But in some cases a videotape may be admissible in court as evidence. And there's widespread use of email documentation presented as evidence in contested cases. There's no question technology moves faster than the law. It's essential to keep up with all of those changes.

I think we are in a unique region for divorce law. Our level of affluence lends itself to a contentiousness you rarely see elsewhere. I'd say the divorce process is more litigious - not less - nowadays, simply because there is more at stake.

The great thing about our firm is our diversity of expertise. On many cases we consult our experts in-house on corporate law and estate-planning, for instance. That adds a level of comprehensive service you don't necessarily receive at small boutique practices so common in our area of the law.

It's not out of the ordinary for attorneys to "over-promise" at the beginning of a case. I'm certain I've lost prospective clients because I didn't pander to people's expectations in an initial consultation. But we are not a high-volume firm: If our level of expertise isn't necessary, we'll recommend at intake that the case is not appropriate for us to handle. It's difficult enough to ensure that a client is happy at the end of a case - why make it more difficult?

I take my work home with me. I go to bed answering emails - and I often wake up answering emails. You could say I am responsive to a fault.

But nowadays that is part of working through a case, trying to always do what's right for our client. Our clients are often very successful people, and very successful people don't like to be put off, don't like to be told "no" - they are not used to dealing with a system that can take a year, even two years, to review and resolve a chapter of their lives. That's how long it can take, especially if assets and/or income is deliberately hidden or obfuscated.

I'm a litigator, but that doesn't mean I automatically "go to the mat" on a case. We don't always end up in court. I am not a battler for the sake of a fight - but I am a very good counter-puncher. My adversaries know that. And so do my clients.