NCP refuses to divulge whereabouts

[BelizeBreeze]

And just so you MIGHT learn something.

Indiana Civil Code
Rule 4. Process
(A) Jurisdiction Over Parties or Persons - In General.The court acquires jurisdiction over a party or person who under these rules commences or joins in the action, is served with summons or enters an appearance, or who is subjected to the power of the court under any other law.

And since we're bandying about the word Subpoena;

Rule 45. Subpoena
(D) (2) (E) Subpoena for a hearing or trial. At the request of any party subpoenas for attendance at a hearing or trial shall be issued by the clerk of court of the county in which the action is pending when requested, or, in the case of a subpoena for the taking of a deposition, by the clerk of court of the county in which the action is so pending or in the county in which the deposition is being taken. A subpoena may be served at any place within the state; and when permitted by the laws of the United States, this or another state or foreign country, the court upon proper application and cause shown may authorize the service of a subpoena outside the state in accordance with and as permitted by such law.

That's the problem with posting information for which you have no understanding. There is no PENDING action before the court which would allow the issuing of a subpoena.

 

[BelizeBreeze]

And before you think about replying, read the following:
Prince v. Graber, 397 Ill. 522, 526-27, 74 N.E.2d 865, 867 (1947)
Season-Sash Mfg. Co. v. Pancake, 421 N.E.2d 652, 653 (Ind. Ct. App. 1981)
Siemens & Halske v. Gres, 37 A.D.2d 768, 768, 324 N.Y.S.2d 639, 640 (App. Div. 1971)
Grumme v. Vuxton, 1 Pa. D. & C. 3d 456, 459-61 (Dist. Ct. 1976)
Blakely v. Washington

And finally a very good discussion of the requirements of subpoena and discovery:

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIANA, FILED FEB 23 1998
WTHR-TV and McGRAW-HILL BROADCASTING COMPANY, INC. d/b/a WRTV-6, Appellants, STATE OF INDIANA, Appellee, v. KRISTA M. CLINE, Appellee.

 

[betterthanher]

Tell it, sista!!!

And speaking of those sites to obtain information, take what they give you with a small grain of salt. They are not always dependable. Where do you think they obtain that information from? And if that info isn't available to obtain...you find yourself back at square one.

 

[BelizeBreeze]

Tell it, sista!!!

And speaking of those sites to obtain information, take what they give you with a small grain of salt. They are not always dependable. Where do you think they obtain that information from? And if that info isn't available to obtain...you find yourself back at square one.

To whom are you replying?

 

[betterthanher]

To whom are you replying?

Oops sorry -- you. I just didn't want to use the 'quote' function to scroll through all of that.

 

[BelizeBreeze]

Oops sorry -- you. I just didn't want to use the 'quote' function to scroll through all of that.

Then it's "Tell it Brudda!"

 

[LdiJ]

And the first time they tried that with me I'd own their house, their car and their grandchildren. That is an abuse of authority that a simple country attorney could get dismissed at the District level.

BB...you have never dealt with small town judges...or even rural appellate districts.

I have direct knowledge of at at least a dozen relatives who got jailed for refusing to give up the locations of parents and kids (some of whom had NO IDEA where they were). All the cases were gpv cases, and all pre-Troxel...but it happened. I have to assume that gpv cases aren't the only ones.

If you want to read an appellate court verdict that will make you shake your head...then then research Mehring vs Mehring out of Illinois. Seriously....just the preface to that case is worth reading...and is unbelievable.

 

[BelizeBreeze]

BB...you have never dealt with small town judges...or even rural appellate districts.

Another assumption on your part.

I have direct knowledge of at at least a dozen relatives who got jailed for refusing to give up the locations of parents and kids (some of whom had NO IDEA where they were). All the cases were gpv cases, and all pre-Troxel...but it happened. I have to assume that gpv cases aren't the only ones.

And that is inmaterial to the fact that all of these cases could have been settled with a competent attorney.

If you want to read an appellate court verdict that will make you shake your head...then then research Mehring vs Mehring out of Illinois. Seriously....just the preface to that case is worth reading...and is unbelievable.

I have read it and it has nothing whatsoever to do with the question of third-party subpoenas or forcing a third-party to divulge.

Although we have affirmed the trial court's finding of contempt and assessment of attorney fees against the mother, we want to make it clear that, first, those rulings are the result of the mother's failure to appeal the original visitation order and, second, that the burden of proof in these cases is upon the grandparent seeking visitation. If there is a further challenge to the visitation schedule by the mother based upon any change in circumstances, the trial court should be aware that this court's ruling does not in any way alter the burden of proof.

The mother is a party to the original action, not a third-pary and therefore liable for her actions in regards to any orders issued in that action.

Also, the Mehring decision was overturned by the Illinois Supreme Court on April 18, 2002 in Wickham v Byrne, resulting in Gov. Blagojevich signing House Bill 4318 (PA 93-0911, effective January 1, 2005 to reestablish a VERY Limited GPR statute.

The new law abandons the best interest standard and requires grandparents to show that some mental, emotional, or physical harm will come to the child if visitation is denied.

 

[critterperson]

A what? There is no such thing as a 'rule to show cause'

BULL CRAP. A third party is NOT bound by the court order.

And your statutory authority for this is?

And again, that is what the judge can say to the NCP, NOT TO A DISINTERESTED third party not a party to the court order.

And that is more ridiculous OPINION.

and that is NOT the case in this post. Sure you can subpoena just about anyone, but you also have to file an affidavit to the truth of the subpoena and all the other party needs to do to quash the subpoena is point to the standing order of which they are NOT A PARTY TO.

People, I don't give a damn what you THINK you know. On this subject you are acting like fools.

My attorney must be better than you , because within the last year and a half we have done everything I have listed Maybe it's you that THINK you know more than you do....JMO....I am glad I have the attorney I do...Think about it for one second.....why would a third party pay the money to an attorney to prevent going to court? It costs them absolutely nothing to show up without one, and once they are there most people tell the truth under oath especially when what they have to say won't negatively affect them. After court they can tell their buddie that they felt the pressure of the court to tell what they knew...
So, Quote all of the case law you would like, but if you were worth your grain of salt as an attorney you would be looking to make case law for your clients as apposed to using the effort of other Superior attorneys to make the case law for you...... Good attorneys challenge the system for their clients. Let me guess you are an attorney in the practice of aiding deadbeats? I guess when you think about it your pretty smart, because there are a lot of deadbeats out there, and because they are stiffing their kids they have more money for your fees ……….Good for you! I personally couldn’t sleep at night…. Oh just an FYI.. Case law is created when an attorney challenges the current case law on a given subject, and wins his/her argument....Being the smart attorney that you claim to be you know that

 

[MrsKos]

I have tried a number of free and even pay sites - I have the guy's full name, ssn, birthdate, and still can't find anything - he doesn't have a driver's license, hasn't had a "real" (& by real, I mean the kind that takes taxes out on its employees) job in years, hasn't filed a tax return in a number of years, has no bills in his name, and doesn't owe anybody but me. He does not have a paper trail of any kind past the year 2001. Which is what led me to the desperate question of wanting to know if a 3rd person could divulge, since I know for a fact that both of his sisters know where he is.

Do you have any idea where he may be, city, state? I was goign to suggest running a "Dead Beat Dad" notice in the local newspaper lol! I don't know if that is legal or not, but it may just be... Other than that, you could hire a private investigator...

 

[BelizeBreeze]

Do you have any idea where he may be, city, state? I was goign to suggest running a "Dead Beat Dad" notice in the local newspaper lol! I don't know if that is legal or not, but it may just be... Other than that, you could hire a private investigator...

Which is exactly what I advised at the BEGINNING of this thread but unfortunately, the tolls took over with opinion and I have a feeling the poster is no longer here. I only hope she doesn't waste her time and money taking such troll advice.

That's what happens when idiots are allowed to post. People stop listening when they hear what they WANT to hear.