AMy L Neiman is a court appointed minor counsel in a high conflict divorce cases that involved minor children. She is usually makes sure that her clients are in a custody of the most problematic parent while the "normal" parent puts all his energy, health and money to save his/her children. This kind of situation is a predictable earnings of government money for up to 17 years and up to 100, 000 dollars per child. These children are being abused by denying their basic rights by the criminal and/or mentally ill custodial parent, minor counsel, social workers, police officers and more...

Here is an open letter of one of the parents that were slaved into the battle to save his 3 y.o. son and 8 y.o. daughter from their mentally ill mother and from their court appointed minor counsel the MONSTER Amy L Neiman (Santa MOnica, CA)

"OPEN LETTER TO AMY L NEIMAN, ESQ, SFLS, SUPER LAWYER 2005

Hello Amy,

It came to my attention that you continue to deny the visitations with my younger children to my 11-year old daughter and I. It appears that you spare no effort to ruin my normal relationship with my children and any meaningful relationship between siblings. I would like to remind you that despite your tireless and repeated efforts to find any proof of wrongdoing, neither my 11-years old daughter, nor I have ever abused my younger children. All allegations against us were far-fetched and false.

Whether you do it on purpose or unwittingly, your actions are alienating the children against their parents and estranging the children from each other, not to mention that you support and maintain your clients’ (8-years old girl and 3-years old boy) complete isolation from their extended and loving family.

I’d also like to remind you that whether you like it or not, I am a law-abiding citizen. You have the right to personally dislike the father, who has never committed and was never convicted of any crimes, and you have the right to sympathize, feel compassion towards, and be fully supportive of the mother, who has the proven (beyond reasonable doubt) history of violence towards the children and otherwise, including battering the children, attacking a policewoman, destroying property, causing injuries to her husband (that would be me), etc. Let us also not forget her using drugs and being a patient at a mental hospital. However, you do not have the right or a good reason (or excuse) to not do your job, which includes helping your minor clients to have a relationship with their older sister, their father, and their extended family. If you feel otherwise, please, let me know. I would be very interested to know what you think your job is in this case.

You have already tried (unsuccessfully) to tighten the visitation rules for the children and their father through court. Despite His Honor’s clear words that he wants to normalize the relationship between the children and their parents and his refusal to tighten the rules, you continue to take unilateral actions to prevent normal contact between the parents and children. The court takes these relationships very seriously, as you were reminded by Hon Judge Meisinger on 06/17/2010.

You refused to let 11-years old sister to see her 3-years old brother, who loves and missed her a lot and suffers because of not seeing her. He does not like to talk on the phone, as you hopefully know. You stated that the sister can see her brother on paid visitations only, knowing that there is no money for it. I would like to remind you that she has not committed any crime, either. By denying the rights of visitation to the 11-years old child and her father you made your clients suffer and inflicted emotional distress on all the children, not to mention their father, thus once again taking steps to prevent all involved from having normal and meaningful contact with each other.

You are well aware that the entire family struggles to find the money to finance the meetings between the children and between the younger children and their father at least once a month. So knowing that, you’re trying to double the price for these precious meetings by demanding additional paid monitors without any reasonable cause. This action effectively eliminates even the rare occasions when the children may see each other and their father. This is an extortion of money from my family, as well.

While the convicted criminal and mentally unstable mother (who was also on probation for her conviction for battering the children) was able to meet with all three children wherever she wanted three times a week, you limited the law-abiding and normal father to meeting with the three children in the prison cell-size room and requested the presence of one or MORE paid monitors. By doing so, (aside from everything else) you demonstrate to the children that their mother, who abused them and is a convicted criminal, has more rights than their father, who did nothing of the kind and is a law-abiding citizen. You are planting the idea into the children’s mind that it is better to be a criminal and abuser than to love and defend your children and be a law-abiding citizen. As a Certified Family Law Specialist you have to be aware that you are creating the wrong role model for the children, and thus you are ruining their future, not to mention potentially endangering the society and American democracy by ruining the children’s morals.

To reiterate, ever since you had become the minor counsel in this case on 08/26/2009 the contact between the father and children were reduced to the point of insignificance, the contacts between the younger children and their extended family dropped to zero, and all attempts to improve the situation, even those agreed to by my wife, were refused and denied by you.

Your role in this case can be described in three words – abuse, alienation, and isolation.

Ivan V Rubtsov

Father of three"


Almost 2 years these 2 small children are begging to see their sister and their Dad and their grandparents and there is NOBODY to hear it or to care. Actually, the older sister has another minor counsel named Ruth L Estep who does the same - means NOTHING to help her 12 years old client to have ANY kind of contact with her siblings. NOTHING IS HERE GOING BY THE CALIFORNIA FAMILY LAW OR AMERICAN CONSTITUTION.
MONEY IS THE ONLY BEST INTEREST THAT IMPORTANT.