Michael P Hrycak Law Office

Write a Review908-789-1870

CLOSED NOW - Opens at 8:30am

I recommend Michael Hrycak as both a litigator and appellate counsel. He has been handling my matter for over three and a half years through trial and appeal. We are now preparing to retry the case after he succeeded, against great odds, before a three judge panel of the Appellate Division in their reversal of Judge Issenman on his allowing 5 and 10 year old boys relocated from New Jersey to California without even considering a visitation plan, much less analyzing it as required in Baures v Lewis. Furthermore, Judge Issenman's attempts to force a below market sale by a real estate agent that the judge personally used before for his own matters were also stopped. Finally, Judge Issenman was neutralized in his attempt to try this case while the father was mobilized with the U.S. Army. Mr. Hrycak sought and secured justice and I would recommend him to anyone, especially in contentious cases such as custody and relocation, as well as Servicemembers' rights

I recommend Michael Hrycak as both a litigator and appellate counsel. He has been handling my matter for over three and a half years through trial and appeal. We are now preparing to retry the case after he succeeded, against great odds, before a three judge panel of the Appellate Division in their reversal of Judge Issenman on his allowing 5 and 10 year old boys relocated from New Jersey to California without even considering a visitation plan, much less analyzing it as required in Baures v Lewis. Furthermore, Judge Issenman's attempts to force a below market sale by a real estate agent that the judge personally used before for his own matters were also stopped. Finally, Judge Issenman was neutralized in his attempt to try this case while the father was mobilized with the U.S. Army. Mr. Hrycak sought and secured justice and I would recommend him to anyone, especially in contentious cases such as custody and relocation, as well as Servicemembers' rights

Michael prosecuted a case at trial and appellate level with astonishing results. Even though he was hampered by New Jersey's grant of absolute immunity for court appointed psychologists, the evaluation by Dr. Mathias Hagovsky was proven to be biased and flawed before a panel of three Appellate Division judges. Furthermore, it was proven that Judge Issenman had ignored the mandate of relocation analysis specified by Baures v Lewis by failing to demand a visitation plan from the relocating mother, thereby allowing relocation of two children, ages 10 and 5, 3000 miles from their father, and further ignoring the New Jersey Supreme Court's mandate to deny relocation if no visitation plan is proposed. Judges Stern, Newman, and Sabatino of the Appellate Division found Judge Issenman's mishandling of the case alarming and remanded the matter with the directive that Judge Issenman must properly follow the dictates of Baures v Lewis. Mr. Hrycak's unrelenting efforts on appeal are comendable.