Filing in Strict Reply

[blue26079]

What is the name of your state? Washington

My local, county (Kitsap), court rules allow a 'strict reply' which I can file in response to a response to my motion. I'm limited to three double spaced pages and have about five hours to do this - the amount of time between deadline to file a response and deadline to file a strict reply. I've looked at some examples of this in my county case archives, but apparently not enough to know what I was doing. I'm representing myself in a divorce and my wife's attorney is her brother in law, so there is a personal angle and he takes advantage of anything he can to prevent an effective action. I did get some slack from the judge for being pro se, and he read my reply, but my order was denied. The reasons for the denial seem sound, but only because I tried to be straight and my wife exaggerated everything. Can anyone fill me in on the key points of what a strict reply is? I know it has to address only the issues brought up in the response to my motion - and I did that, but still apparently made some mistakes.

 

[justalayman]

Why do you say you made mistakes? Filing a strict reply to the issues indlcated in the denial doesn’t mean your motion will then be approved. Your motion can still be denied even after the strict reply.


Where did you find the time limit for your strict reply? the This is from the Washington civil court procedure rules;

Any documents in strict reply shall be similarly filed and served no later than 12:00 noon on the court day before the hearing. No documents shall be submitted to the Court unless opposing counsel or the self-represented litigants have been timely provided with copies.

https://www.kitsapgov.com/pubdef/Documents/Kitsap County Local Court Rules - Complete Set.pdf

Unless the hearing was set for the following day and it was not possible to have the strict reply filed prior to noon, I don’t understand where a court would allow only 5 hours for your strict reply.


The key point is that you address deficiencies or issues noted in the denial of your motion.

 

[blue26079]

There are different deadlines for different courts. Motions filed in domestic relations court hearings have a deadline for responsive affidavits by noon the day before hearing.Strict reply is due by 5pm (also the day before the hearing) to be served on opposing counsel, and then must be filed the day of the hearing. That's where the five hours come in. Since the hearings in domestic relations start at 9am, this means the actual filing can be done after the hearing - which seems backwards, but there is only a half hour window between the time the clerks office opens at 8:30 and the hearings start on 9 on Fridays.

I didn't file strict reply in response to the denied court order, only in response to the responsive affidavit of the opposing counsel - a declaration in opposition to my motion for appointment of Guardian ad Litem. I do have 10 days to appeal the decision of the court denying me my motion, but that seems silly. Like I said the judgment was reasonable given what I and my wife's attorney said. I just emphasized the wrong things and they exaggerated and obfuscated. The crucial mistake happened 9 months earlier when I agreed to conditions which I tried to reverse, and I agreed to them because I got bad advice from my first attorney who told me reversing temporary orders would be easy later on. It wasn't. And he in turn got spooked because my wife made vague allegations of child abuse, which were enough to matter if they were called to court's attention at the start of divorce (when the court had no other documents) and not specific enough for her to be held accountable for them later on. She just backpedalled very carefully about me being a danger to the kids, and my motion for appointment of Guardian ad Litem was denied. It was a very clever bit of work by someone who has no scruples and is 'good' at manipulating the court this way.

I just got outmaneuvered.

 

[justalayman]

There are different deadlines for different courts. Motions filed in domestic relations court hearings have a deadline for responsive affidavits by noon the day before hearing.Strict reply is due by 5pm (also the day before the hearing) to be served on opposing counsel, and then must be filed the day of the hearing. That's where the five hours come in. Since the hearings in domestic relations start at 9am, this means the actual filing can be done after the hearing - which seems backwards, but there is only a half hour window between the time the clerks office opens at 8:30 and the hearings start on 9 on Fridays.

I didn't file strict reply in response to the denied court order, only in response to the responsive affidavit of the opposing counsel - a declaration in opposition to my motion for appointment of Guardian ad Litem. I do have 10 days to appeal the decision of the court denying me my motion, but that seems silly. Like I said the judgment was reasonable given what I and my wife's attorney said. I just emphasized the wrong things and they exaggerated and obfuscated. The crucial mistake happened 9 months earlier when I agreed to conditions which I tried to reverse, and I agreed to them because I got bad advice from my first attorney who told me reversing temporary orders would be easy later on. It wasn't. And he in turn got spooked because my wife made vague allegations of child abuse, which were enough to matter if they were called to court's attention at the start of divorce (when the court had no other documents) and not specific enough for her to be held accountable for them later on. She just backpedalled very carefully about me being a danger to the kids, and my motion for appointment of Guardian ad Litem was denied. It was a very clever bit of work by someone who has no scruples and is 'good' at manipulating the court this way.

I just got outmaneuvered.

So you weren’t asking about a response to a motion (in response to the court’s statement when denying said motion) but a reply affidavit in response to a response affidavit. Gotcha. Asking the ambiguous question speaking of a response to your motion suggests you were possibly speaking of a court’s response to your motion.

It’s also not “a” strict reply. It’s a reply affidavit in strict reply. In strict reply refers to the limitations put upon the contents and form of the affidavit.

A car driver can out maneuver a guy sitting on a board because the board ain’t got no wheels. Your inaccuracies in your question suggest you’re driving a board. You need to either buy some wheels or learn to surf or you’re likely to get run over.


I can make no sense of your statements about a guardian ad litem. A gal is assigned by a court to represent the children’s interest in the proceedings. Since the parents are considered to not be objective, it allows the gal to investigate and make recommendations to the court based on the findings in the best interest of the children. I’m also not sure why you don’t feel vindicated by the court’s denial to appoint a gal since it would appear the request is somehow based on allegations of you abusing the children. I suspect your request didn’t address the crux of the matter which I suspect is likely your belief she is manipulating the children. You made no such suggestion here so why you requested a gal and why it was denied is a mystery.

to Your original question; since the reply affidavit is very specific to the opposing party’s response affidavit, it’s not really possible give you the key points of what to include in a reply affidavit other than; a concise reply to the statements or claims made in the opposing party's response affidavit and support for your statements showing why their response is not accurate or should be held in disregard and not weigh against your motion.

 

[blue26079]

About the GAL appointment. What I lost is having a GAL evaluate me as the better fit parent to continue raising two teenage boys based on my success in providing structure and growth in their lives in contrast to my wife's chaotic, sentimental and appeasing patterns, as she tries to be their friend rather than their parent. That validation of the charges of child abuse being unwarranted seemed important at first, but really those were easy to dispel given that I was given unsupervised visits - and that should have been the point my first attorney should have made - or advised me to make - that there was no evidence - no third party testimony - no reports to social services or police - just an accusation coming out of nowhere.

It was a shocking accusation and I (as well as my attorney) gave it too much weight - but he thought the court would err on the side of caution. Well, now, ten months later those original accusations don't hold much weight - but they did in the beginning.

The court decided that a GAL was not warranted because I did sign an agreement to have my kids 4 days every two weeks (on advice of my attorney); because they are doing OK in school (for which my wife is claiming credit, even thought they always did well in school), and because there was not enough of a 'serious difference' in custody dispute to appoint a GAL. That last one the judge admitted he didn't quite know how to evaluate precisely, and this is probably why I lost. I did not accuse my wife of anything horrendous, just a negative influence that hasn't shown up yet, because not enough time has passed and I had already established a lot of structure during the time I had with my kids (who are now 14 and 17). I asked for equal custody, because for now that's still best for them. She asked for greater custody to secure material advantage, but while claiming she did it to 'protect' the kids - which makes no sense if she agreed to unsupervised visitation. So, since no significant change occurred between the signing of the orders and now - which is true - my motion was denied. The crux here is that there were significant reasons - and still are - for appointment of GAL - but I nullified them by the agreement at beginning of the divorce process. . .

Like I said, this was a very clever bit of work holding in place contradictory allegations, moving from one to the other while avoiding the contradictions with double talk. My mistake was not insisting on pointing out the contradictions. and in agreeing to the Temporary Orders to begin with.

As far as reply affidavit in strict reply, I thought there were specific parts to it. I was outmaneuvered by the opposing counsel filing two long documents 9 and 10 pages respectively - a Declaration in Opposition and a Memorandum in Opposition - that rambled on about a number of things and made so many 'points' I had little chance to fit adequate response into my three pages. . . I still managed to compose and serve two replies with supporting exhibits in five hours - two because I got two responsive documents - but the judge told me to pick only one of them for consideration.

Sorry if this doesn't make sense, there are a lot of details to this, and I am trying to keep it short, but apparently creating confusion by limiting detail.

 

[stealth2]

Generally speaking, going pro se against a legal professional is not a good plan.

What I am reading is that you agreed to a temporary parenting plan and did not provide adequate reasons to move from the status quo provided therein.

 

[blue26079]

Generally speaking, going pro se against a legal professional is not a good plan.

What I am reading is that you agreed to a temporary parenting plan and did not provide adequate reasons to move from the status quo provided therein.

That's exactly right.

I am now learning, that in a divorce, all compromises undertaken to preserve the continuity of a marriage, came back out as unresolved conflicts. In our situation, both my wife and I have compromised deeply, over 23 years, trying to bridge our differences, instead of walking away from each other long before we had children. She at least made a transition toward adversarial self-preservation. I keep making mistakes as some deeper part of me continues to compromise against my self-interest, then scrambles to repair the damage I created to my own case. I've now gone through the cycle several times. Watching my own train wreck in slow motion. On repeat.