BACK YOUR SMACK!!!!!!
You talk alot of smack......back it up!
Quick ducking the issue or queries with insults! FACT NOT SMACK!
the post of the child born in 64, reuniting with dad after mom cut off contact years before......
1. How do you insist you know all.....isn't it true the OP does not give their relationship to those of the senerio?
2. Your assumptions about OP being the child and wanting to sue for money, was just that an assumption.
3. If a order for support had been established in years past, Dad could be liable for the arrearage.
4. If a cs order has not been ordered, Dad will not be liable for retro support.
You talk alot of smack......back it up!
Quick ducking the issue or queries with insults! FACT NOT SMACK!
the post of the child born in 64, reuniting with dad after mom cut off contact years before......
1. How do you insist you know all.....isn't it true the OP does not give their relationship to those of the senerio?
2. Your assumptions about OP being the child and wanting to sue for money, was just that an assumption.
3. If a order for support had been established in years past, Dad could be liable for the arrearage.
4. If a cs order has not been ordered, Dad will not be liable for retro support.