NALA ACP - Family Law common mistakes
NALA ACP - Family Law · Understand the traps and how to avoid them.
Giving the client legal advice or opinions about likely outcomes (e.g., 'the judge will probably award you 60% of the house') instead of relaying the attorney's assessment or explaining procedure and options in neutral terms.
Candidates study substantive law (equitable distribution, custody factors) and naturally want to demonstrate that knowledge to the client, blurring the line between explaining the law and applying it to the client's specific facts, which is the attorney's exclusive function.
What to do instead
Practice reframing every substantive statement into a procedural or informational one: 'I can explain how the statute defines marital property and what documents we need, but the attorney will advise you on how it applies to your case.' Before any client contact, write down which questions you may answer and which must be routed to the attorney.
Accepting a new client's account at intake without screening for conflicts, prior representation of the opposing party, or the client's own litigation history, and opening a matter before the attorney clears it.
Intake checklists feel like paperwork, so candidates rush to gather facts about the dispute and skip the conflict and eligibility screen, assuming the attorney will catch problems later.
What to do instead
Run conflicts and prior-matter checks first, before substantive intake; document who was checked and when. Treat 'no matter is opened until the attorney signs off on conflicts' as a hard rule, and note in the file any close-call relationship (shared employer, family business, prior consultation by the spouse).
Filing a divorce petition in a county or state based on where the client currently lives or where it is convenient, without verifying domicile/residency duration and the correct venue county.
Candidates focus on the grounds for divorce and treat jurisdiction and venue as a formality, forgetting that residency requirements are statutory and that a defective filing can be dismissed or later attacked.
What to do instead
Build a jurisdiction-and-venue checklist into every petition draft: state residency duration, county residency, where the parties last lived as a married couple, where the children have resided for the past six months, and any prior case in another state. Verify each item against the client's documents, not just their recollection.
Treating all property as divisible and proposing a split without first classifying each asset as marital, separate, or mixed, and without tracing separate contributions commingled into joint accounts.
Equitable distribution tables invite candidates to jump straight to percentages, and mixed or commingled assets require tracing work that is easy to skip under time pressure.
What to do instead
For every asset, write a one-line classification with the supporting evidence (date of acquisition, title, source of funds, documentation of tracing). If classification is contested or tracing is incomplete, flag it for the attorney rather than assigning a value to the distribution schedule.
Calculating spousal support from a single guideline formula or a rough percentage of income disparity without identifying the statutory factors, the duration of the marriage, and the difference between temporary and post-divorce support.
Guideline calculators give a false sense of precision, and candidates memorize one formula without noticing that many states use advisory guidelines plus a multifactor analysis, and that temporary and permanent awards follow different rules.
What to do instead
Draft support analyses in two layers: first list the statutory factors with the facts supporting each, then show any guideline calculation as an advisory cross-check. Explicitly label the request as temporary, rehabilitative, or long-term, and state the assumed marriage duration and income figures with their source documents.
Drafting a parenting plan or custody recommendation that states a bare timesharing percentage and holiday label without specifying exchange times, locations, transportation responsibility, communication rules, right of first refusal, and decision-making authority.
Candidates treat the parenting plan as a summary of the schedule rather than an enforceable order, so they omit the operational details that generate later modification and enforcement motions.
What to do instead
Use a completeness checklist for every parenting plan: regular schedule with exact times and exchange locations, holiday and school-break rotation by year, travel and relocation notice, communication between parents, contact with the child, medical and educational decision-making, and a dispute-resolution step. Read the draft as if you were the parent enforcing it on a Friday night.
Computing child support from gross income alone, ignoring additions such as health insurance premiums, childcare, and extraordinary expenses, and ignoring the effect of parenting time, other children, or a self-employed parent's business deductions.
Candidates memorize the basic income-shares percentage and stop there, missing the worksheet adjustments and the documentation needed to establish income for a self-employed or underemployed parent.
What to do instead
Complete the full guideline worksheet line by line, labeling each input and its source document (pay stubs, tax returns, business profit-and-loss statements, prior support orders). Separately note any deviation request and the statutory basis for it, and flag imputation questions for the attorney rather than estimating income yourself.
Producing or describing documents in discovery without logging them, without preserving metadata and the original file, and without a privilege or redaction review before production.
Candidates focus on getting the documents out the door to meet a deadline and treat document management as clerical, overlooking that family law files routinely contain privileged communications, third-party medical records, and sensitive child information.
What to do instead
Maintain a privilege log and a production index for every request, with Bates-style numbering and a record of what was withheld and why. Keep native files and originals untouched, produce copies, and route any questionable document (therapist records, attorney emails, communications with a new spouse) to the attorney before it leaves the office.
Filing a motion or pleading that mixes requests for relief, omits a required certificate of service or proposed order, or fails to check local rules on page limits, formatting, and hearing notice periods.
Candidates draft from the substance of the request and rely on a generic template, so procedural components specific to the court and motion type get dropped.
What to do instead
Keep a motion checklist per court: caption and case number, specific relief requested, factual and legal basis, supporting affidavit or exhibit list, certificate of service, proposed order, and the local notice and filing deadlines. Cross-check the checklist against the court's local rules page before filing, and calendar the response and hearing dates immediately.
Pushing the client toward settlement or mediation without screening for domestic violence, power imbalance, or coercion, and without preparing the client for what mediation will and will not decide.
Candidates see settlement as the efficient and cooperative outcome and assume mediation is always appropriate, missing that safety screening and informed consent are prerequisites, and that some issues cannot be mediated.
What to do instead
Complete a safety and suitability screen before scheduling any ADR session, document the client's stated concerns, and confirm the attorney has advised on the limits of confidentiality and the mediator's role. Prepare the client with a written list of their priorities and walk-away points, and never let the paralegal evaluate or endorse the substantive settlement terms.