Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Veteran seeks child support info.

Collapse
X
  •  
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Friend In Court
    replied
    Re: Veteran seeks child support info.

    Originally posted by forum_admin View Post
    Please could we stop all further personal comments on this matter going forward. We would appreciate it very much!
    Thank you very, very much!

    Leave a comment:


  • Forum Crew
    replied
    Re: Veteran seeks child support info.

    Please could we stop all further personal comments on this matter going forward. We would appreciate it very much!

    Leave a comment:


  • Friend In Court
    replied
    Re: Veteran seeks child support info.

    Originally posted by sunlover View Post
    Whcih may or may not be true but regardless you ar enot a Lawyer and its not up to you to discredit other posters. Where I find my self not agreeing with Goddess often it still not my place to tell other users to ignore her
    The 'discrediting" here is being attempted by you, Disagreeable and the "Goddess."

    Leave a comment:


  • Friend In Court
    replied
    Re: Veteran seeks child support info.

    I hate to disagree. But adult children have sued for back ordered child support. The very case you quote is not on point for child support was never ordered. That is a different set of facts than where child support was ordered and the obligor refused to pay.

    There is no "common law right to retroactive support." That is the holding in the case where no support order was ever made.

    When one takes Legal Research they learn how to apply the facts and the law. The case the Goddess has cited is not on point for the poster -- where support was ordered and the obligor refused to pay.

    Those who have no formal legal education who choose to jump on me show by their posts that they do not understand the law well enough to be giving out advice to others.

    And a child suing for alimony, intended to support a spouse, is totally inapplicable to adult children. They are not spouses. ANOTHER case that has no bearing on the question of delinquent court ordered support.

    Over the past twenty years I have been hired as paralegal, worked for and gotten raises and commendations from attorneys in four (4) states and Canada. Much of my work has been legal research and brief writing. When one is seeking a case on point, the facts of the case are relevant before one starts applying the law.

    A lawyer friend of mine said once, "When you don't have the facts, pound the law. When you don't have the law, pound the facts. When you don't have either, pound the table."

    There's a lot of table pounding by certain people in this forum. The above posts, case on point.

    Leave a comment:


  • goddessoflubboc
    replied
    Re: Veteran seeks child support info.

    Since the other thread was closed:


    FIC has asked me for a citation backing my statement about support not going to the child. I suppose I should thank her as she (I'm doing away with dual pronouns) actually provided a case on point. That she used it in error to prove her point, well.

    Bardol and Bardol v Mary Martin Supreme Court of Florida Case No. SC00-600 (1998).
    In essence, these were children raised by a third party who never sought child support. The children then sued for retroactive child support be paid to them. They lost, and I quote:
    "While the dissent argues the Appellants have
    a common-law right to retroactive support,
    our research reveals no case anywhere in
    which adult children have successfully main-
    tained a suit against their parents for
    retroactive support. In fact, it seems there
    would be good policy reasons why an adult child
    would not have standing to sue a parent under
    these circumstances."

    Leave a comment:


  • goddessoflubboc
    replied
    Re: Veteran seeks child support info.

    Also I happen to be familiar with Dubroc v. Dubroc, 388 So. 2d 377 and if Friend of Court believes it to be on point based on one sentence taken out of context then of refund of the cost of stated education may well be in order.

    Dubroc's had two daughters. During their "childhood" the age of majority was dropped to 18, making them both adults, not due further support. As adults they sued dad for ALIMONY. At the end of the day they both lost.

    Mr. Dubroc paid under COURT ORDER. There was nothing made of him not paying absent an order. It couldn't be less on point if it tried.

    Leave a comment:


  • goddessoflubboc
    replied
    Originally posted by Friend In Court View Post
    Because I am a paralegal with formal legal education, I am considered a paraprofessional.

    Lawyers hire me to; draft legal pleadings, draw interrogatories, do discovery, research points of law, draft legal memorandums and orders -- usually submitting what I have drafted with few to no modifications. In addition I have hands on experience in 15 litigations, state and federal court. Tort, diversity, personal injury some of the claims.

    My over 9 years' family law experience, includes: contested custody, divorce vs. annulment, interstate and jurisdictional disputes, sovereignty issues, child support and maintenance issues, federal income tax ramifications of support orders, parenting profiles and custody evaluations, guardian ad litems and family court reports....
    some of the legal issues I have dealt with.
    Well I hate to burst your bubble but I have likely more education and have a far greater and longer set of experiences, including hundreds of court appearances in several states. It is well-established that payments made absent a court order are counted as gifts unless the recipient agrees otherwise.

    I, of course, would never be so brazen as to suggest esteemed members of the judiciary don't know what they are doing, or that I know better than they - as some "para professionals" seem to feel.

    I have no problems learning when I have erred. It's an important life skill we all need.

    Meanwhile OP is probably completely lost :/

    Leave a comment:


  • sunlover
    replied
    Re: Veteran seeks child support info.

    Whcih may or may not be true but regardless you ar enot a Lawyer and its not up to you to discredit other posters. Where I find my self not agreeing with Goddess often it still not my place to tell other users to ignore her

    Leave a comment:


  • Friend In Court
    replied
    Re: Veteran seeks child support info.

    Originally posted by sunlover View Post
    This would include you correct?
    Because I am a paralegal with formal legal education, I am considered a paraprofessional.

    Lawyers hire me to; draft legal pleadings, draw interrogatories, do discovery, research points of law, draft legal memorandums and orders -- usually submitting what I have drafted with few to no modifications. In addition I have hands on experience in 15 litigations, state and federal court. Tort, diversity, personal injury some of the claims.

    My over 9 years' family law experience, includes: contested custody, divorce vs. annulment, interstate and jurisdictional disputes, sovereignty issues, child support and maintenance issues, federal income tax ramifications of support orders, parenting profiles and custody evaluations, guardian ad litems and family court reports....
    some of the legal issues I have dealt with.

    Leave a comment:


  • sunlover
    replied
    Re: Veteran seeks child support info.

    This would include you correct?

    Leave a comment:


  • Friend In Court
    replied
    Re: Veteran seeks child support info.

    For those that believe supporting their children without court order is a "gift", here are a few cases that might make illuminating reading:

    "At common law, it is the biological or adopted parents who owe a duty to support their children. This obligation is not dependent on marriage, but on a “moral and social obligation” to support the children one has brought into the world. E..g., Dubroc v. Dubroc, 388 So. 2d 377 (La. 1980 (child support is a duty imposed by the fact of maternity or paternity); Goldberger v. Goldberger, 96 Md. App. 313, 624 A.2d 1328, cert. denied, 332 Md. 453, 632 A.2d 150 (1993) (when a parent brings a child into the world, he obligates him/herself to support the child to the best of his/her ability); Wilsey v. Wilsey, 253 Mont. 85, 831 P.2d 590 (1992) (child support is a social and moral obligation); Monmouth County Division of Social Services on behalf of D.M. v. G.D.M., 308 N.J. Super. 83, 705 A.2d 408 (Ch. Div. 1997) (child support is a duty imposed by natural law); Hur v. Virginia Department of Social Services ex rel. Klopp, 13 Va. App. 54, 409 S.E.2d 454 (1991) (child support is a duty imposed by natural law); State v. Duprey, 149 Wis. 2d 655, 39 N.W.2d 837 (Ct. App. 1989) (child support is a human and social responsibility). A recent Connecticut case stated the obligation to support one’s child thus:

    " The commonly understood general obligations of parenthood entail these minimum attributes: (1) express love and affection for the child; (2) express personal concern over the health, education, and general well-being of the child; (3) the duty to supply the necessary food, clothing, and medical care; (4) the duty to provide an adequate domicile; and (5) the duty to furnish social and religious guidance. "


    AND as it belonging to the child, adult children having the right to sue for back support -- even without suppert having been court ordered;

    "Child support is a preexisting and unavoidable duty of parenthood. The common law of the State of Florida provides that the duty of support is for the benefit of and belongs to the children, not their parents." from Bardol and Bardol v. Mary Martin, Supreme Court of Florida, Case No. SC00-600 (1998)

    Most of the opinions in this forum are given by laymen, opinions often having no basis in the law. Well meaning, but erroneous.



    Leave a comment:


  • Friend In Court
    replied
    Re: Veteran seeks child support info.

    Originally posted by goddessoflubboc View Post
    Having sat in court, having reviewed the cancelled checks myself - all of which stated for child support in the memo - then the judge orders arrears calling those checks gifts, you are wrong.

    Regardless of antiquated laws, the fact is unless there's a court order there's no legal obligation. If you believe (as you posted) he needs a DNA test well then he's not even a father yet!!
    As to child support being a "gift" if there is no court order, the state of California has seen it necessary to codify the common law obligation of parents to support their children.

    The judge you report as having said that should not be sitting family law and go back to law school, IMHO.

    If one believes that paying support for their child in lieu of a court order is a gift, let them try to deduct those gifts on their federal income tax returns.

    I am sure everyone's parents told them that providing them food, a roof over their head, clothes and medical care was a "gift" and at any time they could withdraw those gifts and put them out on the street. State criminal laws, notwithstanding.

    Leave a comment:


  • goddessoflubboc
    replied
    Re: Veteran seeks child support info.

    Having sat in court, having reviewed the cancelled checks myself - all of which stated for child support in the memo - then the judge orders arrears calling those checks gifts, you are wrong.

    Regardless of antiquated laws, the fact is unless there's a court order there's no legal obligation. If you believe (as you posted) he needs a DNA test well then he's not even a father yet!!

    Leave a comment:


  • Friend In Court
    replied
    Re: Veteran seeks child support info.

    One clarification I might add to the above posts regarding one's duty to support their child. It is a common law duty to support one's children. One need not cross their arms, stick their checkbook in their pocket and say, "I will support my child only after a court orders me to do so."

    The poster is doing the right thing, supporting his child, voluntarily, without being ordered to do so by a judge in a black robe. No, support is NOT considered a gift without it being ordered. The duty to support one's children is a common law duty, from English law. Failure to do so is tantamount to neglect and abandonment.

    I suggested that one keep track, pay by check or other negotiable instrument so that the record is clear that the father has been supporting his child all along. If state services are used by the mother for the child, these receipts will come in handy.

    Leave a comment:


  • goddessoflubboc
    replied
    Re: Veteran seeks child support info.

    Do not delay in getting a court order. What you pay directly to mom can be deemed a gift which unfortunately happens quite often. For now I would recommend putting the money in an account separate from your other finances. Then when the order is issued you will have the money.

    Edited to add: she won't file, child support counts against her SSI. You will need to file.
    "For SSI purposes, alimony and (child) support payments are cash or in-kind contributions to meet some or all of a person’s needs for food and shelter. These periodic payments may be court ordered or voluntary."

    Leave a comment:

Previously entered content was automatically saved. Restore or Discard.
Auto-Saved
Smile :) Stick Out Tongue :p Wink ;) Mad :mad: Big Grin :D Frown :( Embarrassment :o Confused :confused: Roll Eyes (Sarcastic) :rolleyes: Cool :cool: EEK! :eek:
x
Insert: Thumbnail Small Medium Large Fullsize Remove  
x

the color of a banana is... (write the answer twice with an "@" between the words)

widgetinstance 213 (Related Topics) skipped due to lack of content & hide_module_if_empty option.
Working...
X