The attorneys in family are all corrupt. The system protects them and if there is ever a case against judges that behave in complete disregard for the Constitution and discovery shows what is likely ex-parte judgements there will be more lawsuits. I filed a Title 42 USC 1983 claims against my judges of Federal Court and have just submitted a Writ of Certiorari with the US Supreme Court. We’ll see if there’s justice. Most in the US are too poor for justice. Our system is beyond broken. It’s a Kangaroo court with fraud, obstruction of justice, and out right extortion. Judges and Lawyers are part of the biggest scam in US history. They use the law to shut litigants up and prison to teach them a lesson for advocating for their rights. Judicial immunity has allowed more illegal conduct than any failed immigration policy.
Stephen Krasner has a well-written article, A Broken System: Contempt of Family Court, on family court corruption and just how pernicious it is to society.
My believe is that family court has become one of the best places for those who lack a moral compass to operate. This includes litigants, lawyers, judges, mediators and a host of others who financially benefit from what is clearly criminal activity. Why? Because the reward is high, the risk of being caught is vanishingly small, and the societal prestige great.
Family Courts display true clashes that pit the spirit of the law versus the letter of the law — in a manner that tears parents lives apart, harms children and financially ruins so many people while sustaining a thriving, corrupt and lucrative system.
The institutional corruption is a more mechanical environment that many players operate within and manipulate. The individual corruption is where players are willfully engaging in unethical motives — knowingly gaming the vulnerabilities found within the court’s infrastructure.
Both types of corruption operate and thrive in family court environments as well as those industries and services stemming off them.
If a parent has to go to court to see their child, alienation has already begun with the courts assistance. Court assisted child abuse. Divorce is an industry for those with little or no moral compass and ruin it for the REAL cases where divorce is necessary for the individuals and children if there are any.
Connecticut Courts Must Stop Protecting Corrupt Lawyers
Once again, Connecticut's legal system proves itself to be nothing more than an incestuous playground for lawyers who manipulate the rules while ordinary citizens are crushed under the weight of judicial indifference. Judge Leo V. Diana's decision to merely slap attorneys Randi L. Calabrese and Mohan Sreenivasan on the wrist is a disgrace to justice, a betrayal of the public trust, and yet another example of how corrupt attorneys are given leniency while everyday citizens are held to impossible standards.
A Pattern of Attorney Misconduct and Judicial Protection
The evidence against these two attorneys is overwhelming: they fraudulently placed a $200,000 lien on Dr. Luigi DiRubba's property, defaulted in court, and blatantly disregarded discovery obligations. This wasn’t a mistake; this was calculated fraud. They took advantage of a client’s financial distress and trust to illegally secure payment for legal fees. And what did Judge Diana do? Instead of imposing severe disciplinary action, he ordered additional ethics training. Ethics training? Are we seriously expected to believe that two seasoned attorneys don’t already know that fraud is unethical?
Had DiRubba failed to comply with court orders or neglected legal procedures, he would be sanctioned, possibly held in contempt, and financially ruined. But when attorneys engage in fraudulent and bad-faith litigation, the legal system bends over backward to protect them. This is the two-tiered justice system that DiRubba speaks of—one that favors those in power while punishing those who challenge it.
Attorney Ethics Violations
Calabrese and Sreenivasan's conduct constitutes multiple violations of the Connecticut Rules of Professional Conduct:
Rule 1.7 - Conflict of Interest: Their actions demonstrated a clear conflict of interest, as they pursued personal financial gain over their client’s legal rights.
Rule 1.15 - Safekeeping Property: Fraudulently placing a lien on a client’s property constitutes gross misconduct regarding client funds.
Rule 3.3 - Candor Toward the Tribunal: Failing to disclose the fraudulent nature of the lien to the court is a direct violation.
Rule 3.4 - Fairness to Opposing Party and Counsel: Their refusal to comply with discovery obligations is clear evidence of their bad-faith litigation tactics.
Rule 8.4 - Misconduct: Their fraud and dishonesty violate the foundational principles of legal ethics.
Each of these violations alone warrants serious disciplinary action, including suspension or disbarment. Collectively, they demonstrate an undeniable pattern of misconduct. Yet, instead of real consequences, Judge Diana grants them a lifeline. Why? Because Connecticut's legal system thrives on mutual protectionism.
Connecticut Case Law and Statutes Support Severe Consequences
Under Connecticut General Statutes § 53a-119, fraudulently obtaining property through false pretenses is considered larceny. Furthermore, the Connecticut Supreme Court has repeatedly upheld the principle that fraudulent conduct by attorneys is grounds for disbarment (see Statewide Grievance Committee v. Egbarin, 61 Conn. App. 445 (2001)). This case established that attorneys who engage in fraudulent transactions should be permanently disbarred, not sent to ethics class.
Similarly, in Burton v. Mottolese, 267 Conn. 1 (2003), the court reinforced the idea that attorneys who fail to comply with court orders and discovery requests can be held in contempt and sanctioned. Why were these precedents ignored in favor of leniency?
The Judiciary Must Be Held Accountable
Judge Diana’s refusal to impose real consequences sends a loud and clear message: corrupt lawyers in Connecticut have nothing to fear. This decision does nothing to restore trust in the legal system; instead, it reinforces the public’s justified skepticism that judges protect their own.
The Statewide Grievance Committee must take immediate action and disbar both Calabrese and Sreenivasan. Anything less would be a direct endorsement of legal fraud. Additionally, there must be a formal review of Judge Diana’s handling of attorney misconduct cases. His pattern of leniency enables corruption and erodes public confidence in the judiciary.
Connecticut’s courts have long operated as an exclusive club, where the rules only apply to those outside the system. That ends now. The people of Connecticut demand transparency, accountability, and equal application of the law. If the judiciary won’t enforce ethical standards, then it’s time the people demand reforms that will.
There is much fraud in the action and conduct of attorneys. As well as psychologist. I filled a complaint with the department of public health on both the GaL and psychologist. Pointing out the psychologist education was over 30 years old. Asked for proof of professional education in reunification. The investigation was opened on the psychologist. You can not practice in a specialty area if you are not component. Meaning training. I was told from another Mom she is now just doing evaluation and doesn't perform reunification therapy. An evaluation consist of meetings twice with everyone. Mom Dad and child/ children. It's contraindications are abuse and substance abuse. The original works of parental alienation must differancate between estrangement and alienation. When reunification is court order doesn't mean it meets eithical standards. It's the AFCC who is decided to do reunification therapy even when it's estrangement. They are bypassing the standards set from the American psychological association in cases. So the DSM isn't the issue. Eithical standards set in the american psychological association are not being followed. Dr. Childree presented the difference between alienating and estrangement and was never brought back to an AFCC conference. Parents are refusing treatment but want to force children into reunification therapy. Many of these children are already in therapy. They know what is abusive. I agree we have Big problem in either direction. I don't think anyone trusts the court appointments. Nothing but horror. Narssastic parents and borderline personality split children. The family dynamics are already well known. I personally don't believe we need parental alienation diagnosed when it just targets anyone who children are having problems with a parent. Linda gotlibe says all children want a relationship with abusive parents. Ruby Frank didn't. The Yale studies from 2013 point to 32 percent of children in homes with DV don't want contact with the perpetrator. So we are stuck in a big problem. No one seems to be following the rules.
Lastly the initial work specifically states not to remove isolation or ostracize the parent the child is not having a problem with. So these reunification camps are contraindicated even if they are court ordered. This is another AFCC move. So again it's not diagnosis it standards of practice. The psychologist should be refusing in some cases. Judges are override ethical standards. Reunification therapy was not ordered in my case. It was insisted on by a GaL who threatened that custody would be taken away if I didn't agree. Then she proceeded to come to appointment. Engage in nasty behavior trying to persuade the child something was wrong with her mother. She was arguing with the psychologist according to my attorney. The psychologist didn't want anything more than weekly visits in public. Then 5 min phone call
We should also question the eithicy of " coaching". Amy Barker states in 2023 that estrangement should be ruled out. Currently she advertising for $250 dollars you can have a phone coaching session. Where is the evaluation? Judges unaware that Dr. Baker is riding a unicorn 🦄 into the backdoor of the court house. Providing coaching for family court cases that she has not evaluated. Just some food for thought. Cases there are actually eithical questions for providing coaching services. Causing harm and the judges are unaware that the person has been coached due to confidentiality. Even the GaL in my case said my former spouse was coached. All the buzz words are in his statements. It should be a red flag to the judges.
Your absolutely right. Two complaints and no shock the would not incrstigate the powerful labors union attorney. Misappropriation of funds for child legal services. Hidding the payment and leverage to financially ambush another parent. The fees are for the child. They filed mortgage docs with a different employer name on them with different earnings. The grievance committee was given all the evidence and turned a blind eye. Misappropriation of funds is normally grounds for disbarment. As well as what looks like fraudulent mortgage docs. The GaL violated CT general statues. Engaged in mental health services without a license. Had a clear conflict representing the x girlfriend parents prior and throughout the case. Withheld evidence from the court. What people don't realize is there are actually contraindications to performing reunification. These court psychologist are ignoring them. Most of CT family court chosen court professionals have no continuing education in parental alienation and reunification therapy. Which is violation of the rules for professional licensing. Investigation are opened and not followed up on. Ghosted after complaints were opened. They can't find an impartial party to investigate. Cause they are all friends. The bar association closes complaints and you have to call to find out why. Not in writing. Judicial immunity. Trying to hold these attorneys and so called mental health professional accountable is almost impossible. Fraud and material misrepresentation in family law cases is a nation wide issue. They lead you in circles. If you work for a living it's time consuming and difficult to represent your self. When you call a malpractice attorney to represent you they give you the run around. They sent me to a GaL attorney in East Hartford on the human rights commission. I got a lecture on father's rights in Connecticut. He declined the case because he didn't want to have to recuse himself off cases that the GaL was on. They are 100 percent about covering each other. I called the judges office at the urging of the state prosecutor office. They declined my phone call. Judge Diane who never presided over my case sent the letter I mailed back. Making issues public is the only way many can get recourse and warn others.
Hi Heidi, One of the most striking points you made was: "Most of Connecticut’s family court-appointed professionals lack continuing education in parental alienation and reunification therapy." The primary reason for this gap is that neither the American Psychological Association (APA) nor the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5) recognize "parental alienation" as a formal diagnosis. Similarly, reunification therapy is not an established or evidence-based treatment endorsed by major psychological and medical organizations. Consequently, insurance companies do not cover these services, leaving parents to bear the significant financial burden, often paying hundreds or even thousands of dollars out-of-pocket.
However, what is recognized in the DSM-5 is Parent-Child Relationship Problem, a legitimate clinical issue that can be diagnosed and treated through family therapy, a widely accepted and insurance-covered intervention. Given this, any Guardian ad Litem (GAL) who is a social worker or attorney and recommends parental alienation treatment or reunification therapy—without proper medical or psychological credentials—may be engaging in the unauthorized practice of medicine or psychology. Such actions could warrant disciplinary measures, including disbarment or legal charges for practicing without a license.
This lack of oversight and reliance on unverified treatments not only imposes undue financial strain on parents but also raises serious ethical and legal concerns about the integrity of the family court system. It is imperative that courts prioritize evidence-based interventions and hold professionals accountable for recommendations that fall outside their scope of expertise.
Attorneys posses a "sacred" position of trust for thier clients and the industry. They know everything about them in the case of divorces. All that information is a very powerful position to be in. Most states require that attorneys report other attorney ethics violations, majority turn a blind eye enabling and emboldening ever increasing egregious violations. They have progressed from "little" violations to grave ones. The industryd demands the HIGHEST standards of ethics..they are public servants.
Scripture says if you can't be trusted with little things, you can't be trusted with big things.
Disbar 'em. What they did was willful, predatory and malicious. It illuminates thier, character not a mistake. It was precalculated and then critical data withheld. It was fraud.
Yes, I can see this article is right regarding disbarrment. Plus the two lawyers created legal troubles for Dilucca and he had to use his finances to get out of the trouble the lawyers created for him. The lawyers should not not be given preferential treatment just because they have personal troubles.
No matter how "sophisticated" you are, procedural safeguards exist for a reason. A lawyer is your fiduciary. You're supposed to trust them. The level of sophistication means nothing in a relationship of trust.
I agree with you. But people who are making large purchases or mortgaging things should read automatic orders and attorneys normally explain these things to their clients. The two divorce lawyers know better. It is standard operating procedure. My x husband took out a mortgage during the divorce. The addendum to the mortgage wasn't filed with the mortgage docs. He must of gotten permission from the judge.. using marital funds. His divorce attorneys signatures are on the mortgage docs on record. The child support paperwork doesn't match the mortgage information. These attorneys have gotten away with all kinds of stuff for years.
The attorneys in family are all corrupt. The system protects them and if there is ever a case against judges that behave in complete disregard for the Constitution and discovery shows what is likely ex-parte judgements there will be more lawsuits. I filed a Title 42 USC 1983 claims against my judges of Federal Court and have just submitted a Writ of Certiorari with the US Supreme Court. We’ll see if there’s justice. Most in the US are too poor for justice. Our system is beyond broken. It’s a Kangaroo court with fraud, obstruction of justice, and out right extortion. Judges and Lawyers are part of the biggest scam in US history. They use the law to shut litigants up and prison to teach them a lesson for advocating for their rights. Judicial immunity has allowed more illegal conduct than any failed immigration policy.
More on Family Court Corruption
Stephen Krasner has a well-written article, A Broken System: Contempt of Family Court, on family court corruption and just how pernicious it is to society.
My believe is that family court has become one of the best places for those who lack a moral compass to operate. This includes litigants, lawyers, judges, mediators and a host of others who financially benefit from what is clearly criminal activity. Why? Because the reward is high, the risk of being caught is vanishingly small, and the societal prestige great.
Family Courts display true clashes that pit the spirit of the law versus the letter of the law — in a manner that tears parents lives apart, harms children and financially ruins so many people while sustaining a thriving, corrupt and lucrative system.
The institutional corruption is a more mechanical environment that many players operate within and manipulate. The individual corruption is where players are willfully engaging in unethical motives — knowingly gaming the vulnerabilities found within the court’s infrastructure.
Both types of corruption operate and thrive in family court environments as well as those industries and services stemming off them.
If a parent has to go to court to see their child, alienation has already begun with the courts assistance. Court assisted child abuse. Divorce is an industry for those with little or no moral compass and ruin it for the REAL cases where divorce is necessary for the individuals and children if there are any.
Connecticut Courts Must Stop Protecting Corrupt Lawyers
Once again, Connecticut's legal system proves itself to be nothing more than an incestuous playground for lawyers who manipulate the rules while ordinary citizens are crushed under the weight of judicial indifference. Judge Leo V. Diana's decision to merely slap attorneys Randi L. Calabrese and Mohan Sreenivasan on the wrist is a disgrace to justice, a betrayal of the public trust, and yet another example of how corrupt attorneys are given leniency while everyday citizens are held to impossible standards.
A Pattern of Attorney Misconduct and Judicial Protection
The evidence against these two attorneys is overwhelming: they fraudulently placed a $200,000 lien on Dr. Luigi DiRubba's property, defaulted in court, and blatantly disregarded discovery obligations. This wasn’t a mistake; this was calculated fraud. They took advantage of a client’s financial distress and trust to illegally secure payment for legal fees. And what did Judge Diana do? Instead of imposing severe disciplinary action, he ordered additional ethics training. Ethics training? Are we seriously expected to believe that two seasoned attorneys don’t already know that fraud is unethical?
Had DiRubba failed to comply with court orders or neglected legal procedures, he would be sanctioned, possibly held in contempt, and financially ruined. But when attorneys engage in fraudulent and bad-faith litigation, the legal system bends over backward to protect them. This is the two-tiered justice system that DiRubba speaks of—one that favors those in power while punishing those who challenge it.
Attorney Ethics Violations
Calabrese and Sreenivasan's conduct constitutes multiple violations of the Connecticut Rules of Professional Conduct:
Rule 1.7 - Conflict of Interest: Their actions demonstrated a clear conflict of interest, as they pursued personal financial gain over their client’s legal rights.
Rule 1.15 - Safekeeping Property: Fraudulently placing a lien on a client’s property constitutes gross misconduct regarding client funds.
Rule 3.3 - Candor Toward the Tribunal: Failing to disclose the fraudulent nature of the lien to the court is a direct violation.
Rule 3.4 - Fairness to Opposing Party and Counsel: Their refusal to comply with discovery obligations is clear evidence of their bad-faith litigation tactics.
Rule 8.4 - Misconduct: Their fraud and dishonesty violate the foundational principles of legal ethics.
Each of these violations alone warrants serious disciplinary action, including suspension or disbarment. Collectively, they demonstrate an undeniable pattern of misconduct. Yet, instead of real consequences, Judge Diana grants them a lifeline. Why? Because Connecticut's legal system thrives on mutual protectionism.
Connecticut Case Law and Statutes Support Severe Consequences
Under Connecticut General Statutes § 53a-119, fraudulently obtaining property through false pretenses is considered larceny. Furthermore, the Connecticut Supreme Court has repeatedly upheld the principle that fraudulent conduct by attorneys is grounds for disbarment (see Statewide Grievance Committee v. Egbarin, 61 Conn. App. 445 (2001)). This case established that attorneys who engage in fraudulent transactions should be permanently disbarred, not sent to ethics class.
Similarly, in Burton v. Mottolese, 267 Conn. 1 (2003), the court reinforced the idea that attorneys who fail to comply with court orders and discovery requests can be held in contempt and sanctioned. Why were these precedents ignored in favor of leniency?
The Judiciary Must Be Held Accountable
Judge Diana’s refusal to impose real consequences sends a loud and clear message: corrupt lawyers in Connecticut have nothing to fear. This decision does nothing to restore trust in the legal system; instead, it reinforces the public’s justified skepticism that judges protect their own.
The Statewide Grievance Committee must take immediate action and disbar both Calabrese and Sreenivasan. Anything less would be a direct endorsement of legal fraud. Additionally, there must be a formal review of Judge Diana’s handling of attorney misconduct cases. His pattern of leniency enables corruption and erodes public confidence in the judiciary.
Connecticut’s courts have long operated as an exclusive club, where the rules only apply to those outside the system. That ends now. The people of Connecticut demand transparency, accountability, and equal application of the law. If the judiciary won’t enforce ethical standards, then it’s time the people demand reforms that will.
There is much fraud in the action and conduct of attorneys. As well as psychologist. I filled a complaint with the department of public health on both the GaL and psychologist. Pointing out the psychologist education was over 30 years old. Asked for proof of professional education in reunification. The investigation was opened on the psychologist. You can not practice in a specialty area if you are not component. Meaning training. I was told from another Mom she is now just doing evaluation and doesn't perform reunification therapy. An evaluation consist of meetings twice with everyone. Mom Dad and child/ children. It's contraindications are abuse and substance abuse. The original works of parental alienation must differancate between estrangement and alienation. When reunification is court order doesn't mean it meets eithical standards. It's the AFCC who is decided to do reunification therapy even when it's estrangement. They are bypassing the standards set from the American psychological association in cases. So the DSM isn't the issue. Eithical standards set in the american psychological association are not being followed. Dr. Childree presented the difference between alienating and estrangement and was never brought back to an AFCC conference. Parents are refusing treatment but want to force children into reunification therapy. Many of these children are already in therapy. They know what is abusive. I agree we have Big problem in either direction. I don't think anyone trusts the court appointments. Nothing but horror. Narssastic parents and borderline personality split children. The family dynamics are already well known. I personally don't believe we need parental alienation diagnosed when it just targets anyone who children are having problems with a parent. Linda gotlibe says all children want a relationship with abusive parents. Ruby Frank didn't. The Yale studies from 2013 point to 32 percent of children in homes with DV don't want contact with the perpetrator. So we are stuck in a big problem. No one seems to be following the rules.
Lastly the initial work specifically states not to remove isolation or ostracize the parent the child is not having a problem with. So these reunification camps are contraindicated even if they are court ordered. This is another AFCC move. So again it's not diagnosis it standards of practice. The psychologist should be refusing in some cases. Judges are override ethical standards. Reunification therapy was not ordered in my case. It was insisted on by a GaL who threatened that custody would be taken away if I didn't agree. Then she proceeded to come to appointment. Engage in nasty behavior trying to persuade the child something was wrong with her mother. She was arguing with the psychologist according to my attorney. The psychologist didn't want anything more than weekly visits in public. Then 5 min phone call
We should also question the eithicy of " coaching". Amy Barker states in 2023 that estrangement should be ruled out. Currently she advertising for $250 dollars you can have a phone coaching session. Where is the evaluation? Judges unaware that Dr. Baker is riding a unicorn 🦄 into the backdoor of the court house. Providing coaching for family court cases that she has not evaluated. Just some food for thought. Cases there are actually eithical questions for providing coaching services. Causing harm and the judges are unaware that the person has been coached due to confidentiality. Even the GaL in my case said my former spouse was coached. All the buzz words are in his statements. It should be a red flag to the judges.
Your absolutely right. Two complaints and no shock the would not incrstigate the powerful labors union attorney. Misappropriation of funds for child legal services. Hidding the payment and leverage to financially ambush another parent. The fees are for the child. They filed mortgage docs with a different employer name on them with different earnings. The grievance committee was given all the evidence and turned a blind eye. Misappropriation of funds is normally grounds for disbarment. As well as what looks like fraudulent mortgage docs. The GaL violated CT general statues. Engaged in mental health services without a license. Had a clear conflict representing the x girlfriend parents prior and throughout the case. Withheld evidence from the court. What people don't realize is there are actually contraindications to performing reunification. These court psychologist are ignoring them. Most of CT family court chosen court professionals have no continuing education in parental alienation and reunification therapy. Which is violation of the rules for professional licensing. Investigation are opened and not followed up on. Ghosted after complaints were opened. They can't find an impartial party to investigate. Cause they are all friends. The bar association closes complaints and you have to call to find out why. Not in writing. Judicial immunity. Trying to hold these attorneys and so called mental health professional accountable is almost impossible. Fraud and material misrepresentation in family law cases is a nation wide issue. They lead you in circles. If you work for a living it's time consuming and difficult to represent your self. When you call a malpractice attorney to represent you they give you the run around. They sent me to a GaL attorney in East Hartford on the human rights commission. I got a lecture on father's rights in Connecticut. He declined the case because he didn't want to have to recuse himself off cases that the GaL was on. They are 100 percent about covering each other. I called the judges office at the urging of the state prosecutor office. They declined my phone call. Judge Diane who never presided over my case sent the letter I mailed back. Making issues public is the only way many can get recourse and warn others.
Hi Heidi, One of the most striking points you made was: "Most of Connecticut’s family court-appointed professionals lack continuing education in parental alienation and reunification therapy." The primary reason for this gap is that neither the American Psychological Association (APA) nor the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5) recognize "parental alienation" as a formal diagnosis. Similarly, reunification therapy is not an established or evidence-based treatment endorsed by major psychological and medical organizations. Consequently, insurance companies do not cover these services, leaving parents to bear the significant financial burden, often paying hundreds or even thousands of dollars out-of-pocket.
However, what is recognized in the DSM-5 is Parent-Child Relationship Problem, a legitimate clinical issue that can be diagnosed and treated through family therapy, a widely accepted and insurance-covered intervention. Given this, any Guardian ad Litem (GAL) who is a social worker or attorney and recommends parental alienation treatment or reunification therapy—without proper medical or psychological credentials—may be engaging in the unauthorized practice of medicine or psychology. Such actions could warrant disciplinary measures, including disbarment or legal charges for practicing without a license.
This lack of oversight and reliance on unverified treatments not only imposes undue financial strain on parents but also raises serious ethical and legal concerns about the integrity of the family court system. It is imperative that courts prioritize evidence-based interventions and hold professionals accountable for recommendations that fall outside their scope of expertise.
Attorneys posses a "sacred" position of trust for thier clients and the industry. They know everything about them in the case of divorces. All that information is a very powerful position to be in. Most states require that attorneys report other attorney ethics violations, majority turn a blind eye enabling and emboldening ever increasing egregious violations. They have progressed from "little" violations to grave ones. The industryd demands the HIGHEST standards of ethics..they are public servants.
Scripture says if you can't be trusted with little things, you can't be trusted with big things.
Disbar 'em. What they did was willful, predatory and malicious. It illuminates thier, character not a mistake. It was precalculated and then critical data withheld. It was fraud.
Yes, I can see this article is right regarding disbarrment. Plus the two lawyers created legal troubles for Dilucca and he had to use his finances to get out of the trouble the lawyers created for him. The lawyers should not not be given preferential treatment just because they have personal troubles.
Luigi is a very intelligent business man. If he leveraged his business to win in family court he knew exactly what he was doing.
No matter how "sophisticated" you are, procedural safeguards exist for a reason. A lawyer is your fiduciary. You're supposed to trust them. The level of sophistication means nothing in a relationship of trust.
Automatic orders are expected to be followed by every one. So people need to pay attention. It's contemp if you do not.
I agree with you. But people who are making large purchases or mortgaging things should read automatic orders and attorneys normally explain these things to their clients. The two divorce lawyers know better. It is standard operating procedure. My x husband took out a mortgage during the divorce. The addendum to the mortgage wasn't filed with the mortgage docs. He must of gotten permission from the judge.. using marital funds. His divorce attorneys signatures are on the mortgage docs on record. The child support paperwork doesn't match the mortgage information. These attorneys have gotten away with all kinds of stuff for years.