Responding to Mississippi case

An anonymous father comments below to my previous post:

It's interesting that you don't entertain or mention the possibility that the father wanted no part of his son's life, and that it was his absentee fatherhood that led, in part, to his son's later criminal behavior.

Is it really your contention that it's solely mothers who are keeping fathers out of kids' lives after a divorce?

No, it is not just mothers. It is also judges, lawyers, psychologists, court-appointed evaluators, legislators, and others who devalue the father's role.

Second, we don't learn anything about the background of the father from this article. He may be an upstanding guy who is being mistreated by the courts and his ex-wife. He might also be a deadbeat who just wants to get out of paying child support. He might be somewhere in between. We just don't know from the article.

You're right, I am making some inferences. It is possible that the mother did a fine job of raising the boy. It is possible that the boy is innocent, but has been falsely accused and convicted of murder. It is possible that the mother tried to persuade the father to have a real father's role in the boy's upbringing, but the father refused. I just don't think that those possibilities are very likely. If I get more info, I'll post it.

Until the case is decided, the mother is entitled under the current interpretation of the law to continue to collect child support.

No, the case has been decided. The parents took the case to the Mississippi Supreme Court, and the father lost. That is the end of the line. The father has to pay.

Even if the father is a deadbeat dad, he still shouldn't have to support the mother while the son is in prison.

Mississippi father cannot avoid child support

Mississippi news:

Tyler Edmonds, now 16, was convicted of murder in 2004 in the shooting death of his half-sister's husband. He was 14 at the time of the slaying. He is serving a life sentence. ...

Still, many [fathers] try to get out of paying child support.

Danny Edmonds just tried another track and failed.

Yes, he thought that he could get his child support order lifted because the boy is in prison. Nope. The court says that he has to pay.

It is bad enough that single mothers are raising criminals. Maybe if this mother had let the father in on the boy's life, he wouldn't have turned out to be a murderer. Now the mother has a lot of nerve to continue to collect child support while the boy is in prison. It should be called mother support, not child support.

Bureaucrats oppose shared parenting

Wendy McElroy writes:

North Dakota's general election in November will probably include a ballot on a Shared Parenting Initiative, a measure that would make joint child custody the default option in cases of divorce or separation unless one parent was proven to be unfit. A petition for SPI's inclusion has the required signatures and is currently being verified.

But the fact that both state and federal officials have come out against the SPI may cause its defeat.

Unfortunately, welfare agencies and other govt bureaucrats profit the most when mother support and child support laws and orders are the most inequitable. If the parents are actually sharing their responsibility, then there is less need for money transfers, and less chance for agencies to get some of that money. So the welfare agencies are lobbying against the N. Dakota law.

Appeal reinstated

I just got this from the appellate court:

BY THE COURT:
Appellant's motion to vacate dismissal is granted. Appellant shall file the record designation in Santa Cruz County Superior Court within 15 days from the date of this order.

This takes some explanation. I appealed a family court order about 6 weeks ago, and I later got this notice, dated Aug 11:

BY THE COURT:
The appellant having failed to procure the record on appeal within the time limits allowed or within any valid extensions of these time limits, and having further failed to apply to this court for relief from default, the appeal filed on July 13, 2006, is dismissed. (See rule 8(b), California Rules of Court.)

After filing the notice of appeal, I am required to designate the record within 15 days. That means telling the family court clerk what pages to xerox and forward to the appellate court.

I never figured out just what the problem was. Maybe I filed the designation a day late. The clerk only complained about the proof of service because I filed it myself. That is, when I tell the clerk what pages to xerox, I am supposed to send a copy of those instructions to my ex-wife, with someone else dropping it into a mailbox. A lawyer or secretary or even a complete stranger can drop it in the mailbox, but I am not supposed to do it myself. A child cannot do it either. So the clerk asked for proof that I wasn't the one who mailed the copy to my ex-wife.

If this sounds crazy, it is. The court rules call it a "proof of service", but it is not a proof of service at all. It is just a silly rule designed for the convenience of lawyers. When someone like myself doesn't use a lawyer, it doesn't make any sense.

Anyway, I don't know whether the appellate court was quibbling about my record designation or my proof of service. Either way, my 15 days was now past, so I filed for an extension. This turned out to be the wrong move, as I got this in return:

Dear Sir/Madam:
Your Request for extension of time to designate record is returned herewith for the following reason(s):
This case was dismissed on August 11, 2006.
Very truly yours,
MICHAEL J. YERLY, Clerk

Okay, I had failed to recite the right mumbo-jumbo. The main function of the appeals court is find silly technicalities that can be used to dismiss cases. They probably really enjoy jerking lawyers around with their silly rules. They probably also find unrepresented parties like myself annoying, because it doesn't do much good to teach them a lesson.

I checked the rules, and I discovered that I had 30 days to file a motion to vacate the dismissal. So I did that, and sent a copy to my ex-wife. The court didn't quibble about the proof of service on that.

The appellate court granted that, and gave me 15 more days to designate the record. I've already designated the record twice, so I don't know why the court didn't just accept that. If those time limits were really for the purpose of moving the case along quickly, then the court could have done things a lot differently.

The clerk probably thinks that he has taught me a lesson. Yeah, he's taught me a lesson alright.

No fee settlement

I didn't hear back from the Bosso Williams law firm, after I offered to negotiate a settlement on the fees in dispute. Very strange. Maybe the firm has already written off the debt, and does not expect to get paid. Usually businesses at least return calls, when someone offers to pay a bill or settle an account.

Trying to settle legal fees

I contacted my ex-wife's law firm over a month ago regarding settlement of legal fees. Now I find out that her old lawyer is just now contacting my ex-wife about it!

The law firms thinks that I owe it some money, and that my ex-wife owes it some money. Or so I thought. Usually people respond a little faster than that if they want some money. Maybe the firm has lost interest in collecting. I guess that I'll soon find out.

Squeezing fathers for college fees

An Angry Daughter/Sister writes:

I am 31 years old, I have an 18 year old brother who is supposed to be off to college in less than a week. We have the same parents, but they have been divorced since my brother was 2 years old. Our father, decided to "abandon" us somewhere in these last few years. ... He has applied for financial aid and received many scholarships and grants, but there is still a balance due that needs to be paid in order for him to attend school. He has tried contacting my father to ask him to please help him out, whether it be to co-sign a loan for the remainder of the balance, or help him pay out the balance monthly....my father refuses to help out. Refuses! What kind of parent would deny their child a higher education??? ... My point, there should be a way to get my father to pay for his son's education. ...

I guess that the college has decided that the man should pay tens of 1000s of dollars, even tho he was never consulted.

The brother is an adult now. I think that it is unreasonable to track down some man who never had an opportunity to act as a real father to the boy, and then expect him to pay some huge fee that some college wants him to pay.

This letter is typical of those who have devalued fathers to be just a source of money. It would probably be better for the boy if the father refuses to pay.

Court clerk uses email

I just got an email message from the California court of appeal. Weird. I had never heard of courts using email. Lawyers tend to have funny superstitious ideas about email, and courts rules don't recognize email for any procedures, as far as I know.

Getting billed for a sales pitch

I just got a copy of my credit report, and there was a negative item for a $179 bill to Dr. Gregory L. Katz PhD.

I did call Katz a couple of years ago. It was after I got a court-ordered custody evaluation from Bret K. Johnson. Johnson's report appeared to me to be grossly incompetent, but I wanted to get an independent opinion from someone in the business. Katz agreed to look at the report so I sent it to him. I told him that I might want to pay him to give his opinion in court, and he said that he was interested. He also does custody evaluations.

After reading Johnson's report, Katz refused to give me his opinion. Instead he insisted on giving me a sales pitch for his more thorough evaluations. He also said that he charges five times as much as Johnson.

I suppose that I could deduce that Katz thought that Johnson's report was worthless, but Katz didn't say anything useful to me, and he certainly wasn't going to testify in court unless it was to defend his own $8000 evaluation.

Then he sent me a bill for $164.

I paid more money than that to others to get opinions, even when I disagreed with those opinions. But Katz refused to give me his opinion so I saw no reason to pay him.

Shopping carts unsafe

A Calif paper reports:

The nation's pediatricians are warning parents today against putting children in shopping carts.

"Parents are strongly encouraged to seek alternatives," says the American Academy of Pediatrics, which reports that shopping carts were involved in injuries to more than 24,000 children last year, mostly when a child fell out or a cart tipped over. ...

The organization of 60,000 pediatricians says many carts are unstable or have inadequate restraint systems, and they are urging stronger manufacturing standards.

The pediatrician recommendations on stuff like is idiots. Still, I could have used this when my ex-wife accused me of letting our kids run loose in the store.

Ex-lesbian lover wants custody

A mother and ex-lesbian in Virginia might lose custody because a Vermont court says that her ex-lover has some rights.Worldnetdaily reports:

A Vermont court awarded Jenkins "parent-child" contact and visitation. But a Virginia court declared Miller to be the sole parent, ruling the Virginia Marriage Affirmation Act barred recognition of civil unions. ...

Staver pointed out the Miller-Jenkins case is unique because, in addition to dueling federal laws, it represents the first time the courts of two states have issued conflicting decisions over a same-sex union case.

I guess we are going to hear about more cases like this.

Kids are back

My kids just got back from a two-week trip. They reported that they were flower girls in a east-coast wedding. Apparently they were sworn to secrecy until now.

I hope my ex-wife is happy in her new marriage.

Colleges try to hunt down deadbeat dads

State family courts decide parental obligations up to age 18, and there is no obligation to pay for college in most states. Nevertheless, many colleges conduct their own bogus family court analyses in order to facilitate price discrimination! A NY Times article says:

Financial aid directors say they have been seeing more blended families, and unraveling these complex relationships has become increasingly difficult. In deciding which parents should contribute and how much, directors try to get an overall picture of family relationships. Does the student have a room in both homes? Does a remarried parent have the expense of stepchildren? Has the custodial stepparent had a long connection with the student, or has he or she just married into the family?

Sarah Lawrence College collects information from all four parents and takes a particularly close look at the stepparent the student lives with, because he or she may have a strong financial effect on the household. "We look at them to be more supportive of household expenses where the student resides, thus freeing up the biological parents’ resources for paying for college," says Heather C. McDonnell, the college’s director of financial aid.

I can understand colleges trying to charge a market rate for their services, but they've got no business prying into private lives in order to extort extra fees.

NY state seizing ghetto kids

Here is a long NY Times article about inexperienced social workers who arbitrarily take kids away from their parents.

Mass. move-aways

This Boston Globe story tells how the Mass. supreme court has upheld a joint custody award, and said that one parent cannot just move away.

Another 150 pages for the appeal

I just got a stack of papers from the local court clerk. It seems that my ex-wife successfully persuaded the appellate clerk to add about 150 pages to the record. It includes a lot of her gripes that don't seem to have much to do with the appeal. But I guess she can include any of the case documents that she wants.

The clerk wants acknowledgement that I received the papers. Am I supposed to write a friendly letter, or what?

It seems to me that the clerk could automate a lot of this stuff. It already maintains a web site listing the case docket. Why doesn't it send me an email asking me to check a box on a web site? Then no one would have to keep track of it.

NY house blown up

This NY story describes a divorcing couple whose fighting got to the point of bombing their house.

In February, New York State’s chief judge, Judith S. Kaye, called on the Legislature to follow the recommendation of a matrimonial commission she had appointed that said that New York should join all the other states in adopting no-fault divorce.

The commission said that New York had put up some of the strictest barriers in the nation to divorce, by requiring one party to prove cruel and inhuman treatment, adultery, or abandonment for a year.

"Divorce takes much too long and costs much too much," Judge Kaye said in her annual address on the state of the judiciary last February. Often, lawyers admitted, some lawyers ratchet up the rhetoric in an effort to resolve cases.

Other states have so-called no-fault divorce, but they use petty and vindictive allegations to decide child custody.

This NY Post story claims that blowing up the house made it more valuable.

Appealing attorney fees

I just filed a notice of appeal in my case with the local family court. I was supposed to pay my ex-wife $5k on July 1 for legal fees, and more money later. I am appealing that order.

It would have paid if the money were actually going to my ex-wife. But the money is for some sleazy law firm that is not even on the case anymore. I figure that if Bosso Williams wants the money, then it should have to at least give its justification to the court. So I am not going to pay until the court says that I have to.

I've looked at the statutes and the case law, and I don't see any legal justification for paying the money. The money is just another example of how the family court system is corrupt.

Illinois court rules

Illinois news:

EDWARDSVILLE - The judges of Madison and St. Clair counties are working together to implement new statewide changes in child-custody cases, including a requirement that parents go through a mediator if their cases aren't resolved within 90 days.

The new rules are the result of a statewide committee made up of judges and lawyers that was asked by the state Supreme Court to look at how to improve the way custody disputes are handled and reduce their impact on children.

I suppose that I should give them credit for trying to fix the problems. But I am not sure that this is any improvement. I got sent to a court mediator here in California, and she didn't see to know what she was doing. It did not help at all.

The new rules are supposed to make cases go faster, but it is still possible for a family court to make a custody decision, and still deny appeals on that decision for years while all the financial issues are decided.

Jailed for contempt

A century ago, a Denver newspaper editor was convicted of criminal contempt for criticizing the courts. The Supreme Court upheld the conviction, saying that truth was not a defense.

I am glad that we have more free speech today.