Letter from Robin Beattie, FLS Chair

The Officers of the Family Law Section travel to as many judicial districts as possible each year to enjoy lunch with the judicial officers. During the luncheons, the Officers provide the bench with information about our educational programming, pending legislation, amicus briefs, and other bar-related topics. We then ask the judicial officers about their concerns.

This year we heard similar feedback in almost every district. We were told that the biggest errors judges are noticing among family lawyers are (1) failure to discuss and recognize all agreements between the parties before a hearing and (2) failure to use statutory factors to support trial arguments and testimony.

Nearly all of the judicial officers told us that they are extremely busy and trial time is at a premium. If family lawyers could improve the presentation of their cases by entering into agreements, even small agreements, and following relevant statutes during hearings, the judiciary would appreciate it and your client will benefit.

I have also heard practitioners lament that they do not have enough time to present their evidence during hearings.  Trial efficiency helps everyone—the attorneys, the bench and our clients.  Following are the skills I have developed to streamline my hearings.

Agreements Matter

When preparing your Trial Management Certificate, you should absolutely be able to agree on the following basics:

1. Date of Marriage.
2. Birthdates and names of children.
3. Court’s jurisdiction over parties.
4. Court’s jurisdiction over children.

Additionally, can you agree on some or all of the following (not an exhaustive list)?

1. Value of a bank account. 
2. Value of a 401(k).
3. Value of a vehicle. 
4. Remaining mortgage balance.
5. Whether an expert is qualified as an expert, and the area of his or her expertise. 
6. Allocation of decision-making responsibilities in one or all areas.
7. Holiday parenting time.
8. Vacation parenting time.
9. A party’s income.
10. The amount of health insurance that is paid for the children and who pays it. 
11. The amount of child care expenses paid each month. 
12. Whether the amount of attorney fees sought is reasonable.

Any one item that you can agree upon WILL save you some trial time and should also gain you some points with your judge.

Statutory Factors

My first job out of law school was at a boutique complex litigation firm in downtown Denver. My boss, Bruce Featherstone, was adamant that trials must start with a review of the statute, and all testimony develops from those statutory factors. Bruce never presented any testimony or evidence that did not clearly tie to a factor, and his trials were organized, efficient, and effective.

This same tactic can be used successfully in a family law case. AND, you should object as to relevance if the other attorney tries to present evidence that falls outside of the statutory factors.

If you have other ideas and suggestions to streamline the presentation of evidence at trial, I would love to hear your ideas.  Please post on our listserve or send me an e-mail at [email protected]. 

If You want My Time, Please Use It Well

18th JD, District Court Judge Peter F. Michaelson
©April 3, 2019

After two years managing a dedicated domestic relations docket in Arapahoe County I have learned a lot about the dynamic I face in the courtroom.  The two most important lessons are, first, there is a never-ending demand for court time; and, second, good lawyers appreciate that, and use the time I give them well.

Good lawyers realize that domestic relations cases are guided by very unique rules, beginning with C.R.C.P. Rule 16.2. Just the caption of the rule- “Court Facilitated Management Of Domestic Relations Cases And General Provisions Governing Duty Of Disclosure” - should make it clear that domestic relations cases are not like other cases you may take. The Court is expected to actively manage these case while the parties have a “duty” – a legal term of art which should be very familiar to every lawyer - to be transparent.

You don’t see that mandate in the rules of civil or criminal procedure and the reason is that the purpose of the rule is reduce “ the negative impact of adversarial litigation wherever possible.” Please remember: there is no jury (see, C.R.S. 14-10-107(6)) listening to your impassioned pleas or sympathetic client. Good lawyers read the law and focus their cases on the statutory standards that guide property division (C.R.S. 14-10-113) and determine parenting in the best interest of the child (C.R.S. 14-10-124). Please, no matter what else, use your time to focus on these standards and the real issues in dispute. Good lawyers don’t attack the other party in order to satisfy a vengeful client. Instead, they present a succinct case addressing the statutory criteria.

Rule 16.2(e)(1) also establishes a fiduciary duty of full and honest disclosure to the other party, and to the Court “of all facts that materially affect their rights and interests and those of the children involved in the case… without awaiting inquiry from the other party.” Information is “material” if it has “some logical connection with the consequential facts” and is ”more than merely probative or relevant evidence.” [emphasis added by author] People v. Roberts; 146 P.3d 589 (Colo. 2006). This scope of disclosure invokes the highest standard in the law – good lawyers recognize they not only owe a duty to their clients, but to the other party as well, as if they are a fiduciary for both.

Because of the broad scope of the rule, and high expectations of the parties, Rule 16.2 (j) allows the Court to impose sanctions for a failure to comply without intervening procedures. No need for Rule 37; a failure to abide by rule may likely result in the imposition of a negative inference, an in limine order, and the imposition of fees and costs. Good lawyers don’t waste their time creating or arguing about disclosure, or even bogging down with discovery requests. The rule makes all of those time consuming and expensive tactics unnecessary. Good lawyers don’t argue about discovery and disclosures because they know that there is no good outcome.

Rule 16.2(c)(3)(C) also requires a duty to confer before proceeding to a temporary orders hearing, and even then, the existence of an emergency.When considered along with C.R.C.P. Rule 121, 1-15(8) which applies to pro se parties as well as attorneys, the Court needs a meaningful certification of conferral and a written motion, possibly supplemented by affidavit (see, C.R.S. 14-10-108(1)) before any temporary hearing should be set unless a child is endangered – in which case C.R.S. 14-10-129(4) applies. Further, the automatic restraining order created by C.R.S. 14-10-107 is, in effect a temporary order from the moment the petition is filed and served. Pursuant to C.R.S. 14-10-107(4)(b0(I) the Court has authority to modify those orders, to include maintaining the financial and parenting status quo in existence at the time of the filing of the petition or the date of separation. Good lawyers confer and solve temporary problems and only request court intervention as a last resort in the face of a crisis; they seek to enforce the orders in existence through contempt proceedings when all else fails.

Last, in Arapahoe County, as in most jurisdictions, the Court issues case management and pretrial orders. Good lawyers study these rules and meet the deadlines. Good lawyers comply with the directions about Joint Trial Management Certificates and, or Joint Spread Sheets. Good lawyers listen when I suggest they place admissible exhibits in a single notebook marked by numbers, and disputed exhibits marked by letters. Good lawyers know that these rules are designed to help you make your presentations in the most effective and efficient way possible for the Court and that frustrating that purpose by not complying is not a good use of their court time.

Good lawyers don’t waste time presenting evidence already subject to stipulations and undisputed facts stated in the JTMC, or with cumulative witnesses, or with notebooks containing duplicative exhibits, or arguments based on inadmissible or irrelevant evidence, or argue about expert qualifications, or have their experts essentially read their reports into the record.  Instead, good lawyers use their time to focus on the facts in dispute, and the flawed basis of an expert’s opinion.

In conclusion, good lawyers in domestic relations cases aren’t adversarial; they accept their fiduciary duty to both parties; they provide expansive voluntary disclosure; they confer exhaustively; and they make efficient presentation at hearing, following the rules of the Court.  If you do these simple things well, you’ll be a problem solver, which, after all what your clients deserve, and the Court has a right to expect.

Tips on Protecting Your Client from Themselves

By Ann Gushurst

Many people going through a divorce are going through the grieving process. Divorce is a loss of identity as a spouse, almost always involve significant financial loss, and can include a loss of the parent’s time with their children. In short, the amount of loss is profound and that is true even for the person initiating the divorce. When humans experience loss, they cope in many ways, but some cyclical emotional states are predictable: denial, anger, bargaining, depression and acceptance¹.

Each one of these stages, while very normal, can wreak havoc on your client, particularly if their spouse is less than understanding and even more so when custody is at issue.

For example, someone who is stuck in bargaining – and this can particularly happen with high-powered individuals unaccustomed to being told ‘no’ – can go overboard trying to craft a ‘deal’ to get their spouse back. This can lead to outrageous attempts using money to buy back the other person that look like extreme coercive control or even the client who, despite restraining orders, has to send that one last note pleading for reconciliation.

On top of these normal stages of grieving, divorce can be caused by or can aggravate an underlying mental health problem. People who are already suffering from an issue – which can range from obsessive/compulsive disorder, depression, bipolar – can find their symptoms aggravated by the stress of a breakup.

In the recent Netflix show Mindhunters, it is claimed that the primary trigger for sadistic sociopaths is romantic breakup; whether that’s true or not, it should never be forgotten that the loss of a spouse/partner is very traumatic and can lead to a lot of dysfunctional behavior.

The first thing you can do, as an attorney, is identify what is going on with your client who is behaving in a non-optimal way. By non-optimal, I mean in a way that hinders or actually hurts their case.

The second thing to do is to seriously think about how you, as an attorney, can be making a bad situation worse. If your client is depressed, telling them negative things is not helping – even if you think they want to hear that you think their ex is a dirtbag. If your client is angry, statements or legal actions that are overly aggressive will just egg them on.

The best advice I can give you is to model the behavior you want your client to emulate. If they are slow getting things done, be sure that you are always on top of the case. If they are overly aggressive, show them how you can be direct with the other side without being demeaning or threatening. If they are wallowing in one aspect of the case – an infidelity or an overnight or whatever they are ruminating on – remind them constantly that this is a finite process, and that life goes on. Be the perspective that they are lacking.

Specific issues you might want to consider are listed below.

Is your client depressed?

Many clients will procrastinate, particularly those who don’t want the divorce, but you have to try and figure out if procrastination is descending into a non-functional depressive state. I’ve counseled attorneys who were ready to ‘fire’ a non-compliant client to consider if the noncompliance is willful or the result of depression. Imagine your client is so depressed that they are unable to gather their financial information; if you fire them, how much worse will they feel? How much more will their position be compromised if you abandon them or even threaten to abandon them?

Depression isn’t always manifested by overt sadness; in particular men may appear more irritated than sad. If you suspect depression, look for changes in appetite, changes in sleep patterns, overly negative feelings that nothing is going to go their way, and even an uptick in physical complaints or sickness. Ask your client if they think they may be depressed. There may be some resistance – more from men than women and more from older clients than younger – to the thought of being depressed, but over the course of my years of practice, some of that resistance seems to be lessening.

What to do: Suggest your client start exercising immediately (exercise is still the best remedy for depression) but also suggest that they get into therapy or talk to their physician.  If your client is so severely depressed that you fear suicide, ask them if they are suicidal.  The prevailing wisdom is that simply asking this question can save lives.  You have several options if you have a non-functioning depressed client.  You can reach out to their doctor/ family (See CRPC 1.14, and be cautious about revealing client confidences) or you can seek the help of a GAL if the client needs one.

If you’re referring them to a therapist, and you sense hesitation, explain how a therapist can really help their cause in court by signifying that they are attempting to work through issues and that it will give another voice to the client if they have to go through a PRE or CFI exercise. Explain how common this is and how you wish all your clients had a good therapist.

Substance abuse often accompanies depression. Be on the lookout for that, and strongly recommend that clients stop using alcohol, which is a profound depressive agent and can make a bad situation a million times worse.

Make sure you refer them to someone who understand the conflict associated with divorce. I often say the only thing worse than no therapist is a bad therapist.

Is your client angry?

Angry clients frequently behave poorly. Angry clients say terrible things, act out like children, put into writing statements that crucify them in court, and are frequently not only impulsive, but are overly sensitive to perceived slights.

What can you do?  Angry clients are problematic on many levels.  First of all, they are almost uniformly sure that their position is the right one, and instead of addressing their behavior, they want to talk about how they are justified in their feelings.  You may find that someone who is behaving badly has a long history of doing so.  And you may also find that they are extremely unhappy to feel judged by you, and that their anger may be at you for pointing out their behavior.

The first thing you can do is recognize that most people who act badly because they are angry are actually feeling very vulnerable; try not to pile on by harshly judging them if you suspect this is the case.

The second thing to do is to explain very clearly and in a non-judgmental way how their actions will be used against them.  I often say something like, “sure, I understand why you did it, but the court is going to see this and think… And there’s nothing any attorney can do that is going to change that perception.”

The third option that I highly recommend is that the contact with the other spouse immediately be scaled down to prevent conflict as much as possible. Suggest curbside exchanges of the children and insist on a system like Talking Parents, Our Family Wizard or my new favorite, Civil Communicator. The last, while more expensive, stops bad emails from going to the other side as it has monitored communications.

With this type of client, depending on the level of bad behavior, one good option might be to suggest an anger management course.  I have yet to have a client enthusiastically agree to complete one, but sometimes they will agree if it’s going to happen anyway.  If you suspect that there has been any physical abuse or there are credible claims of same, you should counsel your client on the wisdom of nipping the problem of evidence in the bud by preemptively taking such a course.  In one case, the instructor of the course told the opposing attorney that she saw no evidence of any anger issues and, lo and behold, that issue was not raised in trial.

Another possible source of support is for the client to seek divorce coaching so that they can learn how to “channel” their feelings and express them in ways that are more productive than sending emails that make their attorney cringe.

There is a lot of debate about the difference between coaching and therapy; my thought on this is that the only real difference is that coaching is more behavior directed and limited in scope.  Divorce coaches typically (but not always) are mental health professionals; I have found them extremely helpful and they are used regularly in collaborative cases.

The angry person should typically not be told “don’t be angry.”  Most people can only really control their behaviors as opposed to their feelings.  Suggest that when they are angry, they take a break from a conversation/ emailing/ etc.  A lot of anger therapy focusses on having people recognize that they are getting angry, because once they are really angry, they have difficulty controlling impulsive behavior.

With people who are really angry, I have in the past either insisted they get into therapy, or had other strong boundaries around representation such as requiring them to forward their emails to their therapist before they send them to their spouse on threat of withdrawing representation.  Rather than telling them that I am trying to control their behavior, I state that I hate to lose cases and I won’t represent someone who is intent on handing bad evidence over to the other side.  Some clients can really relate to that, because to them everything is about winning and losing.

Is your client suffering from an underlying mental health issue?

Probably the most common issue that clients deal with not already discussed above is anxiety.  Anxiety is something that can make a client hesitant to make any decisions for fear of making the wrong one.  Anxiety can keep them up at night and interrupted sleep affects everything.  Anxiety can accompany many other underlying problems like depression, obsessive compulsive behavior to name but two.

If your client is anxious, while exercise can also help, they really should seek some help from either their doctor or a therapist.

Another common issue are clients whao suffer from Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder.   This can be really hard to diagnose because it can just look either like your client is explosive, or in extreme cases, like your client doesn’t care at all.  Ask about the client’s history, because the stress of a divorce can trigger vulnerable feelings that predate the marriage.  Be vigilant, and try to understand rather than to judge.

If you suspect PTSD, steer your client to a therapist equipped to handle that, because treatment can make a huge difference.  In the meantime, try to be supportive, try to stay away from situations that trigger your client, and always double check with your clients as to their feelings if things are getting stressful so that you can take a break; this is particularly important during mediations and trials.

Other issues that can be triggered by a divorce are an underlying personality disorder or traits that look like a personality disorder, for which there is not a lot you as an attorney can do besides recommending that the client get a good, strong, therapist to help them get through the divorce.

While the middle of a divorce is an unlikely time to fix a serious underlying problem, you can help a client weather the divorce storm by keeping their bad behavior to a minimum and away from the divorce process.

Divorce is hard, but if you can get through it with a minimum of stress, your client has a better chance to bounce back to a more normal life.  If handled poorly, your client may be immersed in conflict for the next decade. It really pays to give some thought to how you help them through this time.

Meet the Family Court Facilitator — Joel Borgman of Denver District Court

By Joel Borgman, Esq.
Contributed by Kristi Anderson Wells, Esq., Hunnicutt + Appelman P.C.

1. Where were you born?  Family background?

I was born in Minneapolis, Minnesota to two Iowans. I am the oldest of three brothers and my middle brother and I were both born in Minnesota. My youngest brother is the only one who can claim to be a true Colorado native. We relocated to Colorado for my dad’s job when I was four years old. Growing up we made many trips back to Iowa to visit aunts, uncles, grandparents, and cousins. My parents are both from the Quad Cities, located along the Mississippi River, and I have many fond memories boating and waterskiing on the Mississippi.

2. Where did you attend school?

I grew up south of Denver and graduated from Cherry Creek High School. For a change of scenery, I attended college at Lewis & Clark in Portland, Oregon but (eventually) came home for law school at C.U. Boulder.

3. What brought you to your current position?

I think there are a few life experiences that brought me to my current position as a facilitator. After college I taught English in Japan for a couple years and, upon returning to Denver, needed a job. I ended up working in residential title insurance, which was later somewhat helpful in my property law class but otherwise has been my least favorite job. It did teach me a valuable lesson though: to be satisfied at work I must feel like I am making a difference in peoples’ lives and/or working towards the betterment of society. I left title insurance to teach fourth and fifth grade special education through the Teach for America program.  I had several students who struggled to control their anger and attended a conflict de-escalation training over one summer vacation. I didn’t realize it until I had been facilitating for a few years, but I call on those de-escalation skills all the time. I have become more and more comfortable working amid conflict, both while teaching and in my current position, and believe one of the rewards of my current role is helping individuals navigate through an emotionally trying time.  

4. How did you end up working in the Denver District Court?

I am forever grateful to Judge Starrs for hiring me as her first law clerk after she was appointed. I took the family law course at C.U. and worked on a few domestic relations and juvenile cases through the American Indian Law Clinic, but I wasn’t necessarily interested in working in domestic relations during law school. I figured I would stay with Judge Starrs through a civil and criminal rotation and ultimately end up at a law firm.   However, I found domestic relations tremendously rewarding and fascinating and when my predecessor left I applied for the facilitator position and was fortunately hired.

5. Please describe your judicial district.

As far as litigants of the district, Denver County is quite diverse. We cover the spectrum of socio-economic status and meet with individuals originally from countries covering the globe. No two cases are the same, which keeps the work interesting. I believe over 80% of litigants in Denver appear pro se.  As far as working for the district, I am certainly biased, but I wouldn’t choose to work anywhere else. I think we have an excellent bench and dedicated staff and, as a facilitator, I feel very supported in my role.

6. Who are the judges who may be assigned to a domestic relations case?

Presently, our presiding judge in domestic is Judge Jennifer Torrington and the rest of the judges include Judge Christopher Baumann, Judge Jay Grant, and Judge Darryl Shockley. We also have two magistrates, Magistrate Karen Hubler and Magistrate Michal Lord-Blegen. Judge Baumann will be rotating out of domestic relations this coming July and Judge Elizabeth Starrs will be rotating into his spot. For the most part, new cases and filings within two years of permanent orders are addressed by a judge and filings more than two years after permanent orders are addressed by a magistrate.

7. Briefly describe your court facilitator process.

It depends on whether I’m meeting people for an initial status conference or a post-decree status conference and whether parties are represented. In an initial status conference, my role is to make sure cases are proceeding towards resolution as expeditiously as possible.  I help confirm that the court has both subject-matter and personal jurisdiction, and bring that issue to the judge’s attention if jurisdiction is questionable, and alert the judge to needed experts such as a CFI or, occasionally, GAL. With pro se parties, I explain in detail the paperwork and case requirements and, in all cases, set either a hearing or follow up conference. If I am meeting with parties for a post-decree status conference, we discuss the disputed issue(s) and, if an agreement is reached, I draft the agreement for approval by the judge or magistrate.

8. When are meetings set with you?

Initial status conferences are scheduled by the courtroom clerks when parties or counsel call in to set (as required by the Case Management Order).  At this point in time the facilitators are conducting all initial status conferences in Denver, whether parties are represented or unrepresented. Post-decree conferences are also set by the courtroom staff after the judge or magistrate has determined a post-decree conference may prove productive. Generally, if a post-decree conference is scheduled the clerk chooses an available date/time slot and sends out notice. With some exceptions, the judges and magistrates usually only order parties to appear for a post-decree status conference with a facilitator when each party is pro se. 

9. How often are there follow-up meetings?

We often need to reset initial status conferences because the respondent has not been served or provided notice. Assuming there’s both proof of service and sufficient notice, we typically only hold one initial status conference. Occasionally, attorneys will request a follow-up conference because some issue is in negotiation or awaiting a ruling from the judge and it makes sense to hold a second conference once that issue has been resolved. With post-decree conferences, we typically only hold one conference and, if parties do not reach an agreement, set a hearing, though in certain cases a follow up status conference makes sense.

10. Do meetings need to occur in person or is telephone ok?

For initial status conference it is usually ok for parties to either appear in person or by telephone. If you or your client would like to appear by phone for a conference, please just call or email the facilitator you’re scheduled to meet with. It’s preferable that parties appear in person for a post-decree status conference so that they can sign a stipulated agreement, if one is reached.

11. Do all of the judges in Denver use the same Case Management Order?

We do have a standard pre-decree Case Management Order that is issued in all new cases. However, in the past some judges have issued their own supplemental pre-trial order. At this point in time, though, I do not believe any judges have a separate pre-trial order.

12. What happens when a party wants a temporary orders hearing or other emergency or expedited issue they want addressed?

It depends. For the most part, when parties are represented the judges require a written motion to identify the issues and allow the other party an opportunity to respond. There are occasions when the court will address issues immediately following a status conference, or without a written motion, but that happens very rarely.

13. What is the process to set permanent orders – both contested and uncontested – with and without counsel for both parties?

Again, it depends. Each courtroom has specific requests for how their dockets are set so it partly depends on the courtroom the case is assigned to. Permanent orders are usually scheduled at the initial status conference by the family court facilitator. For the most part, the judge must approve any settings longer than 1 day, i.e., the facilitator will not be able to set a hearing for more than 1 day, and some judges require a written motion for more than 1 day.  Presently, in Courtroom 311, a notice to set outlining the issues and earliest feasible month for a permanent orders hearing is required for settings more than ½ day. In Denver, we essentially set every hearing as a potentially contested hearing to ensure parties and provided enough time on the docket to resolve any disputed issues. Cases involving attorneys tend to be set for a longer hearing than cases without attorneys.

14. What is the best thing about your job?

It is especially rewarding when I can help people work through a dispute in a post-decree conference and leave with a stipulated order. I also appreciate hearing I have alleviated some of the stress of the court process by helping people navigate the paperwork and process.

15. What makes you lose sleep at night?

My wife and I recently started watching The Wire and, if I watch an episode too close to bed, that tends to keep me up. That’s a bit of a joke but I think because I have been in this position for over 5 years, and meet with so many people, work doesn’t tend to keep me up at night. That said, there are some tremendously sad situations, especially when people use their children to seek revenge on each other, that get to me.

16. What is your pet peeve?

People who throw their cigarette butts on the ground.

17. What are common mistakes/frustrations that you have with attorneys?

There are certain attorneys that claim every case needs temporary orders, a PRE, and can’t possibly be set for a permanent hearing at the ISC. In certain cases that may be true but when those assertions become routine whenever that attorney is involved, it seems less about that specific family and more about that specific attorney. I think the other frustration is when attorneys seem flabbergasted that an opposing party would choose to proceed pro se. As facilitators, we have had attorneys ask us to instruct pro se parties that they need to, or should, hire counsel. That decision will always be up to the party and we are never going to instruct or advise someone to hire counsel; that’s not the role of the court. Also, if you look at the trends, the percentage of pro se litigants is only going to increase.

18. If you had three wishes for every family law attorney who comes before you, what would they be?
Please understand how much impact you have on the case.  From my vantage point, good attorneys can help the parties deescalate a tense situation and work towards a resolution that acknowledges the parties will likely be in contact long after the attorney’s work is done. Bad attorneys do the opposite.

Please understand that, at the present time, in Denver your initial status conference will be with a family court facilitator and you will most likely be waiting because we set multiple conferences at the same time to keep the docket moving.

Please help your clients understand that you will not be in front of the judge the day of your initial status conference and temporary orders hearings will usually require a written motion and are usually reserved for the most egregious of circumstances. The reason Denver is reluctant to set temporary orders hearings is to keep the docket moving as quickly as possible.  

19. What is your advice to attorneys handling domestic cases in Denver to make the process work as smoothly as possible?

Aside from my previous answer, my other advice is that we typically set the permanent orders hearing date at the initial status conference and, in most cases, are required by the bench to set the hearing within 6 months of filing.

20. If you could change anything about the way our current system works, what would it be?

This certainly isn’t an original thought but, in many cases, the adversarial process is not just unhelpful but is damaging to parties and their children. I don’t have a solution but, in a world where money is no object, I think some type of intensive “uncoupling” therapy would be helpful before people even start the legal process. I think there are a lot of emotional issues that are not legally relevant, and are therefore not addressed by the court process, but are certainly relevant to the parties and must be addressed for the parties to move forward in a healthy manner.

21. What is your passion?

Music. I am fortunate to be married to someone who shares this passion and a lot of our disposable income is contributed to live music venues.

22. What is the greatest joy in your life?

Spending time with friends and family.

23. What do you want to be when you grow up? Or, if that question doesn’t resonate with you, where do you see yourself in five years?

I really enjoy working for the judicial department so anticipate I will still be with judicial in five years.

24. What do you do for fun?

Listen to music, ski, hike, travel, read, cook and eat.