One of the first things I tell people is that equitable distribution in divorce does not necessarily translate into equal distribution. In fact, most divorce settlements in Pennsylvania do not result in equal distribution of property. There are many factors, but the distribution often favors the income-dependent spouse. Having said all that, it is very important to be realistic about the outcome. Some attorneys make promises they cannot possibly keep just to "sign up the case."

Outcomes are based on many variables. For instance, say a husband has filed for divorce, leaving for another woman. In such instances, guilt can be the great deal-maker. The husband may put a sizeable settlement offer on the table that the court would never mandate. I've been in that situation - on several occasions - in which I've had to urge my client to accept an offer, even if the client's initial reaction is to try to continue litigation simply because he or she is angry. In terms of my practice, I probably do more custody-related work than many of my peers, and the contested custody cases can be the most difficult cases.

One of the biggest problems I've seen relates to so-called earning capacity - how much is a spouse projected to earn going forward, based on his or her education and experience. For example, if someone once made $350,000 per year in a job and that job is eliminated, how realistic is it to assume that he or she will have a similar-paying job in the years ahead? This is a difficult question to answer, especially for a family law court. Interestingly, the outcome can vary greatly from judge to judge.

In my work I get a chance to help people at a time when they most need it. I literally deal with good people at their worst. That is what makes this field of law both very challenging and very satisfying.