Joseph Maya

Our firm’s main areas of focus are employment law, divorce and family law, criminal law, litigation, estate planning, personal injury, education law, and business law.

All of our attorneys are licensed to practice in multiple states, including Connecticut, New York, and New Jersey.

Attorney Maya received his J.D. from the University of Michigan Law School and his B.A., Cum Laude, from New York University. He began his career at Clifford Chance in New York City and he has practiced in the state and federal courts of New York and Connecticut. He is the Managing Partner of Maya Murphy. Mr. Maya was born in Brooklyn, New York and resides with his family in Westport, CT.

Call for your free consultation today!

Employment Law

Employee Benefits, Employment Contracts, Employment Discrimination, ERISA, Overtime & Unpaid Wages, Sexual Harassment, Whistleblower, Wrongful Termination

Criminal Law

Criminal Appeals, Drug Crimes, Expungement, Fraud, Gun Crimes, Internet Crimes, Sex Crimes, Theft, Violent Crimes

DUI & DWI

Probate

Probate Administration, Probate Litigation, Will Contests

Personal Injury

Animal & Dog Bites, Brain Injury, Car Accidents, Construction Accidents, Motorcycle Accidents, Premises Liability, Truck Accidents, Wrongful Death

Education Law

Estate Planning

Guardianship & Conservatorship, Health Care Directives, Trusts, Wills

Family Law

Adoption, Child Custody, Child Support, Father's Rights, Guardianship & Conservatorship, Paternity, Prenups & Marital Agreements, Restraining Orders, Same Sex Family Law

Divorce

Collaborative Law, Contested Divorce, Military Divorce, Property Division, Same Sex Divorce, Spousal Support & Alimony, Uncontested Divorce

Elder Law

White Collar Crime

Arbitration & Mediation

Business Arbitration, Consumer Arbitration, Family Arbitration

Business Law

Business Contracts, Business Dissolution, Business Finance, Business Formation, Business Litigation, Franchising, Mergers & Acquisitions, Partnership & Shareholder Disputes

• Litigation

• Free Consultation
• Contingent Fees

Connecticut

State of Connecticut Judicial Branch

Since 1991

New York

New York State Office of Court Administration

Since 1991

Managing Partner

Maya Murphy, P.C.

1994 - Current

University of Michigan Law School

J.D. | Law

1989

New York University

B.A. | Politics

1984

Honors: Cum Laude

Peer Review Rated

Martindale-Hubbel Lawyers Service

2018

New York State Bar  # 2357648

Member

1991 - Current

Connecticut Bar Association

Attorney Member

1991 - Current

Cases in the News

Various Newspapers

Litigation strategy and the use of technology, Litigation for the small firm

January 1, 2013

Best Lawyer in America

Best Lawyers

2019

Q. So I was recently hospitalized for not being on my medicine and they said I was unsafe around my kids without it..

1 July 2020

A: Generally, a patient’s physician would advise as to what medications a patient may need, in addition to the appropriate dosage etc. To the extent a patient has a health condition, including pregnancy, that may be negatively impacted by the use of a medication, a physician may make a recommendation to change the medication, change the dosage, or suspend its use altogether. If you are under court order to continue to seek treatment of a physician, you and/or your physician may need to confer with the court regarding any change in your treatment plan, as may be necessary from time to time, regardless of any pending pregnancy. Often the court will accept documentation from physicians regarding a recommended treatment plan, which may include temporarily changing or suspending medications, under certain circumstances. It is best practice to ensure you are familiar with all applicable court orders so you understand what your rights and obligations are to ensure you do not violate any orders of the court.

Q. Brother placing mother in AL facility beyond her means and plans to draw down limited assets.

23 June 2020

A: POWER OF ATTORNEY IN CONNECTICUT Generally speaking, Powers of Attorney (POAs) in Connecticut assign decision-making authority typically performed by the principal, to one or more agents. The scope of this authority may be limited or broad and one or more agents may be given such authority. If there is language in the POA addressing specific considerations such as real estate, draw down of assets and inheritance, the terms of the POA that address these topics will be the controlling language Probate Courts examine when determining whether an agent acted within the bounds of his fiduciary responsibilities to the principal. In the absence of language addressing these matters, generally, the standard to which an agent is held is whether he acted in the reasonable expectations of the principal, in the best interests of the principal and the agent is required to keep a record of all receipts, disbursements, and transactions made on behalf of the principal. Please note that with informed consent, a principal may decide to waive certain recordkeeping and/or accounting requirements. An agent’s authority can be terminated if any of the following events occur: • The principal revokes the authority; • The court appoints a conservator and chooses to terminate the agent's authority; • The agent dies resigns, or becomes incapacitated; • If there are co-agents, and they did not act jointly (unless other specified in the POA); or • POA terminates. If there is a suspicion of abuse of power by an agent or co-agent, certain individual(s) may petition the Probate Court to review the agent’s actions. These individuals include: be required to provide an accounting at the request of family members, presumptive heirs or beneficiaries, guardian, conservator, descendants, caregivers, or a person who demonstrates “sufficient interest” in the principal’s welfare. In the event a court finds an agent or co-agent has abused power or used his authority inappropriately, there are available remedies which include, but are not limited to: • Revocation of power of the agent by the principal • Claim for an accounting (as mentioned above) • Claim for conversion • Claim for interference with the inheritance of another An agent who violates the provisions Connecticut’s law on POAs is liable to the principal or his or her successors in interest for an amount required to restore the value of the principal's property to what it would have been if the violation did not occur and reasonable attorney's fees and costs paid on the agent's behalf. Furthermore, an accounting may be required by the court (unless the principal waived certain recordkeeping requirements).

Q. What are the guidelines for secondary education and the contribution by each parent in a divorced household in CT?

3 June 2020

A: In Connecticut, educational support orders are governed by Connecticut General Statutes §46b-56c, which authorizes the courts to enter orders defining how parents will handle “necessary educational expenses” which include application costs, registration costs, room, board, dues, tuition, and fees up to the amount charged by the University of Connecticut for a full-time, in-state student at the time the child registers otherwise known as the “UCONN Cap.” The order may account for the cost of books and medical insurance for the child as well, and parents are permitted, upon agreement, to increase the limit beyond the amount charged by the University of Connecticut. Where parties are able to resolve their case amicably, college expenses may be addressed in one of two ways. First, the parties may simply include in their separation agreement a provision outlining in detail how they will divide such expenses. If the children are very young during the proceedings, and the parties’ circumstances at the time the child will be ready to attend college are unforeseeable, this issue may not be ripe for consideration. In such cases, the parties may wish to defer the issue until the child is older. It is very important to note that if the parties choose this course of action, they must include in their separation agreement a provision expressly requesting that the court retain jurisdiction over issues related to post-secondary educational expenses or it can be forever waived. Indeed, if they fail to do so, the court will not retain jurisdiction, and the parties will be precluded from seeking its involvement in the future. However, if the parties do request that the court retain jurisdiction, either party may request a post judgment educational support order at a later, appropriate time. Once such a post judgment petition for educational support is filed- as with the divorce itself- the parties may either resolve the issue by agreement or request a hearing for this limited purpose. It is important to note that whether a secondary or post-secondary educational support order is entered at the time of the divorce or post judgment, the court must find that it is more likely than not that the parents would have provided support to the child for higher education if the family remained intact. The parties may stipulate to this fact in an agreement, or leave it up to the court to decide. In either event, assuming that threshold requirement is satisfied, the court will then determine whether an educational support order is appropriate. In doing so, the court will consider all relevant circumstances, including the parents’ income, assets and other obligations; the child’s need for support based on his or her assets and ability to earn income; the availability of financial aid, including grants and loans; the reasonableness of the higher education considering the child’s academic record and financial resources available; and the child’s preparation for, aptitude for and commitment to higher education. Again, just like the underlying divorce action itself, the parties can conduct discovery in this post judgment proceeding to unearth the other’s pecuniary status and earnings. At a minimum, they will each likely have to file Financial Affidavits depicting the current snapshot of their income, expenses, assets and debts. Accordingly, the parties ability to pay is examined by the court to determine a fair and equitable contribution by each parent based on their financial circumstances. If you are referring to private high school tuition, the court will treat the issue the same way, particularly if the child had a history of attending private school. If not, the court may rule that neither party has to contribute to private school unless the child has special needs for such a placement.