• FreeAdvice has a new Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, effective May 25, 2018.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our Terms of Service and use of cookies.

10 years no call

Accident - Bankruptcy - Criminal Law / DUI - Business - Consumer - Employment - Family - Immigration - Real Estate - Tax - Traffic - Wills   Please click a topic or scroll down for more.

Status
Not open for further replies.

ceara19

Senior Member
Ladymom said:
My My, aren't we anal...
Yes, people want to know what other people think, they don't want bad want to be lawyers like you mouthing off the cuff about random things.
The great thing about the law is that it can be changed through one voice, so go ahead and attack away..
What I did was make a comment, I didn't profess to be any kind of professional, I simply asked how could a person be made to pay for something if they had no knowledge of the existence of the issue.
Seems to me that you have problems reading...
Have a great day.
IAAL IS an attorney. Regardless of how crass he can be at times, when a person is fortunate enough to get actual legal advice from him, they would be wise to take it. Although he can be somewhat harsh with his personal opinions, I can't recall him EVER giving incorrect LEGAL advice. I have a feeling that he would give a paying client the exact same responses as he gives here. I would much rather spend my money on a good lawyer then a nice lawyer.

Last time I checked this was not www.whatsyourrandomopinion.com. This is not the right place for a person to be if they only want to know what others "think". When a person asks a question HERE, they are looking for the LEGAL answer.

I have never seen any law changed based on the voice of ONE person. It is hard enough to change the laws based on the voice of the MAJORITY.
 


ceara19

Senior Member
Ladymom said:
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.
Now, quote the Massachusetts legal code that says that the non-custodial parent will NOT be held responsible for paying back the state after the state locates them without the assistance of the custodial parent. It can't be done because it does not exist.
 

BelizeBreeze

Senior Member
Ladymom said:
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.
Listen CAREFULLY. You are an idiot. (sorry mary, but sometimes you have to call them as they are).

Now go read Department of Revenue v. Roe 29 Mass. App. Ct. 967, Docket No. 90-P-71. October 19, 1990.
 
Last edited:

googley

Junior Member
well thanks everyone

i never thought i would get quite the response that i got.i think some of you got the wrong impression of me . i went on my own and got a dna test $550.00 so i could be sure before i go disrupting this childs life . after getting the results i have spent 2 great weakends with the boy. i wish i could get the ten years back... ten years ago i was 21 years old. i never new about guy # 1 i am just learning all this as i try to figure out why she hadent told me .
i guess she had all intions of being with this guy for ever.
well thanks for the advice .. i have no intentions of tring to get any money from her i was just curious. i am not happy that she stole ten years of my sons life from me but i am glad i have him now:eek:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Find the Right Lawyer for Your Legal Issue!

Fast, Free, and Confidential
data-ad-format="auto">
Top