Letter from the Editor

• Publication year: 2022
• Author: Written by Craig S. Pedersen Editor-in-Chief

LETTER FROM THE EDITOR

Written by Craig S. Pedersen Editor-in-Chief

Dear Readers,

As each of us has endeavored to return to a way of life that rings more comfortable and familiar, it seems we are inevitably confronted with the reality that in these times even "the old" is inextricably linked to "the new". For whatever else the last two years have been, they are defined by evolution, and it has been an evolution that on the pendulum has swung closer toward spontaneous than gradual.

That reality is no different in the practice of family law and is even embodied in Family Law News. As readers of this issue will quickly notice, our format has undergone a retouch which we hope among other things helps solidify our identity within the body of the California Lawyers Association's scholarly publications. And naturally, above all else we hope the updated format will enhance your reading enjoyment going forward. The transition in format did unfortunately result in production delays with this issue; in that regard, I have appreciated the great patience of our authors, sponsors, and all of you as we have labored to bring this issue to fruition.

In the corner of this "brave new world" that is family law, it seems more and more practitioners statewide are dealing with the thorny question of whether, and to what extent, traditional discovery is available as a tool in Domestic Violence Prevention Act litigation. In this issue, Ryan Wedeking tackles that challenge with a comprehensive, thought-provoking "deep dive" into all the applicable law, managing to prune away many of those thorns. His "Elkins Trumps Speed" article will guide readers well as they strive to better protect the due process rights of their clients, regardless on which side they may find themselves in cases involving allegations of violence or abuse.

As professionals our interest is piqued, and appropriately so, by the subject of professional liability and how to avoid malpractice claims in the first instance. As Justin O'Connell poignantly demonstrates in this issue, if there is one thing less desirable for a litigator than living through the trial with the poor outcome, it is enduring it a second time; particularly when in redux the plaintiff is permitted to demonstrate damages by showing the "what might have been" of employing an alternate strategy or making different professional judgment calls. By better...