Gus Dimopoulos has received nearly every award a matrimonial attorney can earn. He has been named a Super Lawyer by Thomson Reuters each year since 2019 in field of matrimonial law. This honor is bestowed upon less than 5% of the attorneys in the Country and the recipients are vetted through an independent, patent pending selection process. Gus has also been selected as a Lawyer of Distinction in Family Law. He has been selected for membership in Premier Lawyers of America, awarded "10 Best" by the American Institute of Family Law Attorneys, and repeatedly received 's Client Choice Award where he maintains a 10 out of 10 client satisfaction score. Gus has handled some of the most complicated divorce cases on record and is widely recognized as the go-to attorney when matters seem unsurmountable. He has handled extremely contentious custody cases and has consistently succeeded in securing custody on behalf of his clients when there were no settlement options. Gus' familiarity and study of mental illness, forensic evaluations, narcissistic personality disorder, coercive control and drug/alcohol issues help him resolve even the most difficult cases. While no one wants to find themselves in custody litigation, the fact of the matter is - it happens. When it does, Gus' successful track record is unmatched. In fact, other attorneys regularly seek out Gus to handle the custodial aspects of their case, or, bring Gus in---even at the last minute after matters have gone sideways---to conduct custody trials on their client's behalf. In fact, over the last two years alone, in cases involving mental health issues, Gus has successfully obtained a Supreme Court award of sole custody for his clients on six different occasions (for both mothers and fathers). Beyond trial victories, in countless other cases, Gus successful negotiated his client's preferred result without the need for a trial and based in part upon his reputation in the court room. On the financial aspects of divorce, Gus' successes in the courtroom have resulted in 8-figure equitable distribution awards on the one end, and significantly disproportionate equitable distribution awards far below 50/50 on the other. Gus is recognized as a straight-talking, highly skilled negotiator who is not afraid to take a case to trial. Quick-witted, and a problem solver, his skill often lies in understanding the risk and reward to each party's positions (and the psychology behind what is prohibiting a settlement). In a fiercely complex financial matter, when millions are at stake, cool minds must prevail. Gus is not a loud and obnoxious lawyer who needs to pound the table - but rather, he's a thinker who understands that success in the courtroom comes from preparation, an understanding of the law and the facts, and a well-honed strategy. A true trial attorney, Gus is not afraid to try a winnable case - but at the same time, he understands that oftentimes a well-prepared trial strategy and case narrative effectively wins a case by bringing about the desired settlement. In one notable case in Westchester County, a first of its kind, Gus successfully discredited a court appointed neutral valuation expert, leading the Court to value the business at more than 7-times the expert's recommended value. The decision, widely recognized as one of the most important equitable distribution decisions in Westchester County, lead to the creation of a first-ever "hybrid" classes of asset--which was necessary to value the asset at its apex for the client. The decision was affirmed by the Appellate Division, Second Department. The court also issued Gus' client what is possibly the largest counsel fee award ever issued in Westchester County, $1.2 million. The counsel fee award was also affirmed by the Appellate Division, Second Department. Representing a female client who had amassed tens-of-millions working at a hedge fund, Gus and his co-counsel successfully argued that the Husband's actions warranted an award of far less than 50% of the marital estate. The Court, chastising the husband for his greed and his inability to trace $14-$15 million of marital assets he removed from marital accounts, issued an order precluding him from offering testimony at trial as to the disposition of these funds. The Court's preclusion order, in line with Gus' arguments, ultimately led to favorable settlement just days before the trial began. Earlier in the case, Gus tried the issue of custody and overwhelmingly obtained his client's preferred custodial access schedule, and an order providing his client will final decision making over educational matters. Over the course of 20+ years handling complicated divorce matters, Gus has learned the delicate art of managing a crisis. With social media driving the news cycle and social interactions, it takes minutes, not days, for a crisis to develop. In matrimonial law, a crisis can emerge with by an embarrassing social media post, an unpopular news story, or even a threat from a third party to post a salacious photo. Gus understands how to take immediate action to navigate any predicament, implement tactical communication plans, and lead clients through challenging situations--with the goal of always keeping the issue out of Court. Clients routinely turn to Gus before a divorce is commenced to handle the crisis, and work to resolve the matter, with discretion, before either party needs to file for divorce, or a story breaks. Knowing the law is critical; and we have litigated the "take-down" or prohibition on social media posting during divorce actions extensively. In fact, we recently won the leading case in this area of law. New York Courts routinely strike down orders that prohibit social media posting during divorce actions because the prohibition is deemed a prior restraint on one's First Amendment right to free speech. However, Gus argued that this particular social media posting negatively impacted the children and his client's ability to earn a living to support those same children. The Court agreed banned a social media posting to denigrated his client, or discussed the divorce proceeding. The opposing party, appealed the decision and turned to one of the foremost Appellate lawyers (himself a former justice of the Appellate Division, Second Department). However, the decision was affirmed and the ban continued. Since our precedent setting decision in February, 2023, we have been called upon to consult other lawyers looking to provide their clients the same result, and our case has been discussed and analyzed by various bar associations.