To Legalbeagle...re: Child Support

I responded to your response in my last post. Is there anything I can do to challange this?

[I AM ALWAYS LIABLE]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by sha_rae:
[b]I responded to your response in my last post. Is there anything I can do to challange this?[/b]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

My response:

Here, read this. Inasmuch as I don't enjoy losing my (our) taxpayer dollars each of us has paid for your child, the equitable priciples of fairness cry out, nonetheless. I just saved you untold THOUSANDS of dollars. You can send me my fee, care of FreeAdvice.com.
Don't ever say that we didn't do anything for you.

READ THE FOLLOWING, OVER AND OVER AGAIN. THE LIGHT BULB WILL COME ON - - I GUARANTEE IT.

Father had spent 11 years searching for the children after they were abducted and concealed by the mother. Meanwhile, County (through its agents) affirmatively stated in the course of the dependency proceedings and investigations that Father's whereabouts were unknown when in fact its DA child support unit had Father's address.

County "did not truthfully and accurately" inform the dependency court that a thorough investigation and inquiry had been conducted in good faith to locate Father. The elements of reliance and prejudice were also "manifest." It was a "virtual certainty that County would not have incurred the arrearages [during the foster care public assistance period] had [its] misrepresentations not been made." [County of Orange v. Carl D., supra, 76 Cal.App.4th at 439-440, 90 Cal.Rptr.2d at 448-449 (brackets added)]

Further, no injustice would result from applying an estoppel against County. "There will be little if any impact upon the public interest in reimbursing counties for public assistance benefits expended on behalf of children of absent fathers. Counties already have a constitutional obligation to give notice of dependency proceedings to presumed father's. The county's failure to provide the father with his due notice resulted in the prolongation of foster care and the ensuring welfare payments." [County of Orange v. Carl D., supra, 76 Cal.App.4th at 441, 90 Cal.Rptr.2d at 449 (brackets added)]

Laches defense to arrearages enforcement: Despite Ca Fam § 4502 (support judgment enforceable until paid in full, laches (obligee's unreasonable delay in seeking arrearages to obligor's prejudice) has been recognized as a viable equitable defense to the collection of past-due child support. [Marriage of Fogarty (2000) 78 Cal.App.4th 1353, , 93 Cal.Rptr.2d 653, 660-662--prejudice to H found from W's 17-year delay in attempting to enforce arrears when child was then age 32]

Spousal and child support are inherently equitable in nature (within the family law court's historical equity jurisdiction). Therefore, the enforcement of spousal or child support remains subject to the equitable defense of laches. [Marriage of Plescia (1997) 59 Cal.App.4th 252, 259, 69 Cal.Rptr.2d 120, 124 (spousal support); Marriage of Fogarty (2000) 78 Cal.App.4th 1353, 93 Cal.Rptr.2d 653, 657-660 (child support)]

Distinct from lack of diligence defense: The Legislature's elimination of a diligence defense in support enforcement cases did not also eliminate the historical laches defense, which involves different elements:

Whereas "diligence" consists only of delay, "laches" consists of both unreasonable delay in the enforcement of a right and resulting prejudice to the adverse party that makes the granting of relief unfair or inequitable. [Marriage of Fogarty, supra, 78 Cal.App.4th at , 93 Cal.Rptr.2d at 657; Marriage of Plescia, supra, 59 Cal.App.4th at 261-262, 69 Cal.Rptr.2d at 126]

Good luck.

IAAL

------------------
By reading the “Response” to your question or comment, you agree that: The opinions expressed herein by "I AM ALWAYS LIABLE" are designed to provide educational information only and are not intended to, nor do they, offer legal advice. Opinions expressed to you in this site are not intended to, nor does it, create an attorney-client relationship, nor does it constitute legal advice to any person reviewing such information. No electronic communication with "I AM ALWAYS LIABLE," on its own, will generate an attorney-client relationship, nor will it be considered an attorney-client privileged communication. You further agree that you will obtain your own attorney's advice and counsel for your questions responded to herein by "I AM ALWAYS LIABLE."




[This message has been edited by I AM ALWAYS LIABLE (edited October 22, 2000).]

IAAL...First let me just tell you a litle about this situation. My mother took my child giving me NO choice...after having spent several years incarcerated with no vististion and the lies of my mother telling me that my parental rights where termimated...I then return to society a responsable person, attempting to put my life back together. This time is in the excess of 10 years. The lies,deceat etc. Then one day almost two years of being free a Sherriff knocks on my door and hands me 5 lbs. of paperwork. ( late might I add ) telling me I owe 21,770$ of money that my mother received because she CHOSE to take my child and raise it as her own. All the time knowing where I was to ask me for assistance etc. The DSS knew my where abouts and NEVER ONCE sent me ANYTHING stating my mother was receiving money. My mother received the wopping amount of 99$ a month the lowest possible in this state. Which means two things to me, one: she made to much money to get any more then that and two: she didn't need the money. Then my child was placed in a court ordered placement facility without my knowledge, ( being his parent ) and now I am asked by the state to reimburse them for money they have expended to my mother and for this placement he is currently in? My mother is also receiving at her resisdence a 500$ SSI check for my son, who is not even in her physical care, and hasn't been for the past two years, yet she still receives this check. I was informed by the DA that the SSI money she is receiving should be given to the placement he is currently residing for his care and the payment of the place. It is not that I am trying to get "out" of anything as I can clearly sense you think is the case....but how can I be responsible for a debt that I did not know was being made and when I received this assistance? When during this time I was incarcerated.

[I AM ALWAYS LIABLE]

My response:

I read your other post. I know exactly what you said, and have said. You are apparently not rehabilitated. You are still blaming others for your own misgivings and misdeeds in life.

Since you decided to commit a crime, what did you think the authorities were going to do with your child? Family was the best choice. But, you don't see that and are blaming your mother, and everyone else. Look at it this way, if you were a law abiding citizen, and didn't go to prison, would any of this have happened? Would I be paying MY tax dollars for YOUR child?

Remember, it was YOU that decided to be a felon, a criminal, a person unfit to take care of a child, and unfit to live in society by societies rules and laws. No one decided that for you, other than you.

Your mother is not the "bad" person here. Once you come to grips with that "reality" then, and only then, will you begin to understand, and your own healing process will then have begun. It should have begun a long time ago.

People will be judging you for the rest of your life because you're a felon, and they have every right to do so. Your sentence may be over behind bars, but it will never be over while you're in society. That's the hard truth.

Like I said, I'm not very thrilled to have given you the answer to one of your many problems. But, justice and fairness are crying out, and you got very lucky in this instance.

I do not care to discuss these points, or the answer I gave you, any further. I will merely turn my back on you, along with the rest of society.

I gave you the answer. If you don't understand it, or don't like it, I can't help that. "Laches" is the key word. See an attorney.

Instead of whining, why don't you just say "thank you" for the help, both for the answer to your problem, and also for the TAXPAYER money you caused ME to spend on YOUR child.

IAAL


------------------
By reading the “Response” to your question or comment, you agree that: The opinions expressed herein by "I AM ALWAYS LIABLE" are designed to provide educational information only and are not intended to, nor do they, offer legal advice. Opinions expressed to you in this site are not intended to, nor does it, create an attorney-client relationship, nor does it constitute legal advice to any person reviewing such information. No electronic communication with "I AM ALWAYS LIABLE," on its own, will generate an attorney-client relationship, nor will it be considered an attorney-client privileged communication. You further agree that you will obtain your own attorney's advice and counsel for your questions responded to herein by "I AM ALWAYS LIABLE."