10 years no call

[Ladymom]

What does Texas have to do with ANYTHING? Besides, dad repaying government benefits paid for the child IS the letter of the law in Texas.

Texas was a mistype..and so you know, according to the 301st court in the county of Dallas, one has to have knowledge of the act before one can be held responsible.
Give a call to Famiy Court Services in Dallas, they'll tell you that said Dad cannot be held responsible for the other parents prior actions.

 

[stealth2]

Texas was a mistype..and so you know, according to the 301st court in the county of Dallas, one has to have knowledge of the act before one can be held responsible.
Give a call to Famiy Court Services in Dallas, they'll tell you that said Dad cannot be held responsible for the other parents prior actions.

Darlin' - OP doesn't live in TX, so no one in this thread cares about what the law there is.

 

[Ladymom]

which exactly shows your total lack of legal knowledge. look up retroactive child support then shut the hell up.

Since I just went through a very similiar case and had a judge tell me exactly what was just stated here, I think I have an idea what I'm talking about, let me give you her name and perhaps you can tell her she has no legal knowledge.
Susan Rankin, 301st Dallas County.

 

[stealth2]

Since I just went through a very similiar case and had a judge tell me exactly what was just stated here, I think I have an idea what I'm talking about, let me give you her name and perhaps you can tell her she has no legal knowledge.
Susan Rankin, 301st Dallas County.

OP is NOT in Texas. Mass is a looooooooooooong way away. Which part of that is difficult for you to process?

 

[BelizeBreeze]

Since I just went through a very similiar case and had a judge tell me exactly what was just stated here, I think I have an idea what I'm talking about, let me give you her name and perhaps you can tell her she has no legal knowledge.
Susan Rankin, 301st Dallas County.

Look it up idiot. THEN you come back here and tell this forum what it means

 

[Ladymom]

Darlin' - OP doesn't live in TX, so no one in this thread cares about what the law there is.

Yes, I know, thank you, it just seems that it got off that way and the others typing seem to know what Texas said. Regardless, I don't think that anyone here knows every law in every state and I've sat in enough court rooms during study to know that judges, no matter what the law says, have - very much - their own interpretations, so given that common sense will prevail in most cases, I don't think that state assistance would be tracked back to the father.
Yet, what I *think* matters now, I forgot we don't live in a democratic country..oh wait, yes we do.

 

[Ladymom]

Look it up idiot. THEN you come back here and tell this forum what it means

Gosh, aren't we hostile, why are so you judgemental? Bad day?

 

[Ladymom]

OP is NOT in Texas. Mass is a looooooooooooong way away. Which part of that is difficult for you to process?

Oh gheez, I already said I mistyped and someone answered that they knew what Tx law was, thats all.

 

[stealth2]

Yes, I know, thank you, it just seems that it got off that way and the others typing seem to know what Texas said.

Let me type this at a speed that you may be able to read, okay?

D.o...y.o.u...u.n.d.e.r.s.t.a.n.d...t.h.a.t...n.o...o.n.e...c.a.r.e.s...w.h.a.t...T.e.x.a.s... l.a.w...s.a.y.s...i.n...t.h.i.s...c.a.s.e?

 

[BelizeBreeze]

Texas was a mistype..and so you know, according to the 301st court in the county of Dallas, one has to have knowledge of the act before one can be held responsible.
Give a call to Famiy Court Services in Dallas, they'll tell you that said Dad cannot be held responsible for the other parents prior actions.

you really are a dumbass aren't you?

 

[BelizeBreeze]

FAMILY CODE
CHAPTER 154. CHILD SUPPORT
SUBCHAPTER A. COURT-ORDERED CHILD SUPPORT

§ 154.009. RETROACTIVE CHILD SUPPORT. (a) The court may
order a parent to pay retroactive child support if the parent:
(1) has not previously been ordered to pay support for the child; and
(2) was not a party to a suit in which support was ordered.
(b) In ordering retroactive child support, the court shall apply the child support guidelines provided by this chapter.
(c) Unless the Title IV-D agency is a party to an agreement concerning support or purporting to settle past, present, or future support obligations by prepayment or otherwise, an agreement between the parties does not reduce or terminate retroactive
support that the agency may request.
(d) Notwithstanding Subsection (a), the court may order a parent subject to a previous child support order to pay retroactive child support if:
(1) the previous child support order terminated as a result of the marriage or remarriage of the child's parents;
(2) the child's parents separated after the marriage or remarriage; and
(3) a new child support order is sought after the date of the separation.
(e) In rendering an order under Subsection (d), the court may order retroactive child support back to the date of the separation of the child's parents.

Added by Acts 1995, 74th Leg., ch. 20, § 1, eff. April 20, 1995.
Amended by Acts 2001, 77th Leg., ch. 1023, § 4, eff. Sept. 1,
2001.

Yep, no one here knows the TEXAS law even if it DOESN'T APPLY.

 

[Ladymom]

Let me type this at a speed that you may be able to read, okay?

D.o...y.o.u...u.n.d.e.r.s.t.a.n.d...t.h.a.t...n.o...o.n.e...c.a.r.e.s...w.h.a.t...T.e.x.a.s... l.a.w...s.a.y.s...i.n...t.h.i.s...c.a.s.e?

I....a..l...r..e..a..d...y...s..a..i...d...I...d...i...d...n...t...m..e..a..n...t..o..bring Texas into this..
Holy crap, doesn't anyone ever let anything go here..

 

[stealth2]

I....a..l...r..e..a..d...y...s..a..i...d...I...d...i...d...n...t...m..e..a..n...t..o..bring Texas into this..
Holy crap, doesn't anyone ever let anything go here..

Then sthu about TX, already!

 

[Ladymom]

FAMILY CODE
CHAPTER 154. CHILD SUPPORT
SUBCHAPTER A. COURT-ORDERED CHILD SUPPORT

§ 154.009. RETROACTIVE CHILD SUPPORT. (a) The court may
order a parent to pay retroactive child support if the parent:
(1) has not previously been ordered to pay support for the child; and
(2) was not a party to a suit in which support was ordered.
(b) In ordering retroactive child support, the court shall apply the child support guidelines provided by this chapter.
(c) Unless the Title IV-D agency is a party to an agreement concerning support or purporting to settle past, present, or future support obligations by prepayment or otherwise, an agreement between the parties does not reduce or terminate retroactive
support that the agency may request.
(d) Notwithstanding Subsection (a), the court may order a parent subject to a previous child support order to pay retroactive child support if:
(1) the previous child support order terminated as a result of the marriage or remarriage of the child's parents;
(2) the child's parents separated after the marriage or remarriage; and
(3) a new child support order is sought after the date of the separation.
(e) In rendering an order under Subsection (d), the court may order retroactive child support back to the date of the separation of the child's parents.

Added by Acts 1995, 74th Leg., ch. 20, § 1, eff. April 20, 1995.
Amended by Acts 2001, 77th Leg., ch. 1023, § 4, eff. Sept. 1,
2001.

Yep, no one here knows the TEXAS law even if it DOESN'T APPLY.

You are basing this on the presumtion that she informed him of the childs birth and that paternity has been established.
I can cut and paste too, they weren't married, it isn't presumed that he was the father.

Now..here's some cut and paste for you too..
according to the state of Massachusetts...

Public Assistance: If a parent receives public assistance, he or she is required to cooperate with the Child Support Enforcement Division to establish paternity and a child support order. If the parent does not cooperate, his or her benefits may be reduced

In this scenario..who's responsible? She is. Regardless of what you are saying, she did not establish paternity and from what HE says, she led another man to believe the child was his.
I'm out of this, it's ridiculous to keep arguing about moot points and I really don't care what you think of me anyone. If you are getting all your "suggestions" off a web search, I can do the same.
Toodles.

 

[Ladymom]

which exactly shows your total lack of legal knowledge. look up retroactive child support then shut the hell up.

Thank you SO much for helping out a new member, it's people like you that reflect so wonderfully on the morality and honesty of the legal world. Really, would you please let me know what area of law you practice and how many states you are a member of the bar so that when I need to get some legal advice I know just where to go? I cannot tell you enough how much I appreciate the welcoming advice and knowledge that you've shared with me. Having been through a very informitive legal year, I know that many attorneys don't have the inner strength to explain to us layman how the system works. Too many of those who have their foot in the legal system delight in pain, snobbery, humiliation and one-up-manship. I am humbled and feel truly blessed to have found a place where the facts are weighed, considered and everyone has a word..a valued opinion..where mistakes are forgiven, often times laughed at gently and the offending individual is guided carefully to a place where they can learn, oft times eagerly so. The wonderful thing about the world wide web is that there are so many people connected..sharing, learning, asking questions, embracing the different thoughts and actions of others.
Thank you so much, I have learned so much in such a short time. Thank you so much, now I can google more accuratly. Thank you thank you thank you!