• 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.

Am I entitled as the fiancee'?

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

Gracie3787

Senior Member
Jetx,
The OP has already recieved enough correct and incorrect advice to get a start on helping her daughter, so at first I wasn't going to respond to your last post, but I just can't help myself.

You asked me to provide a link to the statute that says that OP's daughter does not have to open her home to anyone simply because a LAWYER (note; not Judge) wants her to:
I provided that link already. Here is another one: The 4th amendment of the US Constitution states:
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, HOUSES, PAPERS, and EFFECTS, against UNREASONABLE SEARCHES AND SEIZURES, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, SUPPORTED BY OATH or affirmation, and particularly DESCRIBING the place to be searched, and the person OR THINGS to be seized.

Although most people think of this admendment as applying to criminal law, the reality is that it applies to all forms of law. No one, for any reason is REQUIRED to open thier home to anyone UNLESS there is a legal search warrant or court order- period. You seem to want OP to believe that her daughter has to just open her front door, allow someone to come into her home and literally take EVERYTHING that she does not have a reciept for just because a lawyer wrote a letter (note- a letter is just that- a letter it is NOT a legal warrant nor is it a court order). Well, fortunately for all of us, our laws do not work that way, thank God.

Now, I have a question for you- can you list any statute in any state that specifically states that a person is REQUIRED to open thier home WITHOUT DUE PROCESS?

A good civil lawyer has to have real good "schoolyard bully" skills, and that is exactly how things are done. In this particular case the lawyer that mom hired used his skills to write a LETTER to a woman who is emotionally upset and very vunerable, demanding that she allow someone she does not want in her home, to come into her home. And, if I remember correctly, you are an attorney, and of course thinking as an attorney you have given advice to OP that just continues the lawyer bullying.
The bottom line for OP is that yes, her daughter will have to turn over her fiancees property, but she does have the right to not be bullied into giving up her own property, which is what you advised her to do.

BTW- The link I posted was the correct one, the only difference between the link I posted and the one you posted is that your link gave a more direct route to the statutes. I think that your comment about it was very petty and very unprofessional.
 
Last edited:


LdiJ

Senior Member
Gotta agree with Gracie on this one. Its her home and the contents are hers unless someone can prove otherwise. The burden of proof is not on her to prove that she owns the contents of her own home.

Now....if it had been his home, and she had moved in with him, then that would be a different story. However that isn't the case.

In addition, it was stated in the first post that he and his mother were not close. Therefore his mother probably knows little to nothing about what he may or may not have owned.
 
Last edited:

nextwife

Senior Member
LdiJ said:
Gotta agree with Gracie on this one. Its her home and the contents are hers unless someone can prove otherwise. The burden of proof is not on her to prove that she owns the contents of her own home.

Now....if it had been his home, and she had moved in with him, then that would be a different story. However that isn't the case.

In addition, it was stated in the first post that he and his mother were not close. Therefore his mother probably knows little to nothing about what he may or may not have owned.
I'm with you, as well. If mom, for example, had a LIST of sonny's property (Sony five speaker home theatre system, circa 2003, model airplane collection, acoustic quitar with red mexican strap) etc. then she could present it to fiancee, who could then remove those from her home to give her. Or mom MIGHT be allowed in to retrieve them, but mom shouldn't get to go on a fishing expedition through fiancee's home, and she shouldn't have to PROVE her stuff in her home is hers.

I sure don't have reciepts anymore for furniture and appliances and art I've owned for years. But I can produce witnesses that can establish that much of this stuff was all mine BEFORE hubby, if need be.
 
Ok I'm pretty sure this is going to sound dumb but oh well.

Is the son older than 18?

I would also think if OP's daughter can prove that her finace was astranged from his mother & step-dad...maybe other family/friends knew about how the son felt about his mother?

Edit: I just woke up so this sounds better that what I'm sure it actually is.
 

JETX

Senior Member
Gracie3787 said:
You asked me to provide a link to the statute that says that OP's daughter does not have to open her home to anyone simply because a LAWYER (note; not Judge) wants her to:
I provided that link already.
Are you naturally this stupid... or are you trying??
First, I didn't ask for a LINK.... I asked you to provide "citations to specific statutes". Of course, since you are a legal idiot.... you don't know what that means... so, in my never ending efforts to teach the less educated...

Citation:
the act of referring to (citing) a statute, precedent-setting case or legal textbook, in a brief (written legal court statement) or argument in court, called "citation of authority."
the section of the statute or the name of the case as well as the volume number, the report series and the page number of a case referred to in a brief, points and authorities, or other legal argument.

Here is another one: The 4th amendment of the US Constitution states:
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, HOUSES, PAPERS, and EFFECTS, against UNREASONABLE SEARCHES AND SEIZURES, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, SUPPORTED BY OATH or affirmation, and particularly DESCRIBING the place to be searched, and the person OR THINGS to be seized.
And again, an idiot. You might not understand this... but the IV Amendment applies to the actions that the government cannot take, as in "UNREASONABLE SEARCHES". It doesn't apply in this case.

Although most people think of this admendment as applying to criminal law, the reality is that it applies to all forms of law. No one, for any reason is REQUIRED to open thier home to anyone UNLESS there is a legal search warrant or court order- period.
See, but that is NOT what you said in your earlier pos. You said, "So I just finished reading thru Ks. probate statutes at www.kslegislature.org This is what I found:". The clear implication is that you somehow discovered this in the Kansas statutes. And of course, now that you are 'called' on your error filled post, you try to spin it another, just as erroneous, direction.

You seem to want OP to believe that her daughter has to just open her front door, allow someone to come into her home and literally take EVERYTHING that she does not have a reciept for just because a lawyer wrote a letter (note- a letter is just that- a letter it is NOT a legal warrant nor is it a court order). Well, fortunately for all of us, our laws do not work that way, thank God.
Jesus Christ, woman!! What the hell drugs are you on??
This forum is for LEGALLY accurate advice. The LEGALLY accurate thing for the OP to do is to try to work WITH the beneficiary's of her fiances estate. If she does as you say, she is likely to be tied up in probate and legal proceedings for years... with untold costs incurred.

So, while calling you an idiot... where in the hell in ANY of my posts did I say anything about "opneing the front door, allow someone to come into her home"... much less to "literally takiing ANYTHING"??
Of course, I didn't. More of your mental fart.
 

LdiJ

Senior Member
Come on Jett....go back and re-read your answers. I also thought you were basically giving the same answers that Gracie thought you were giving. That may not have been what you intended, but it sure came across that way.
 

Find the Right Lawyer for Your Legal Issue!

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