to IAAL re John R. Silva's case in California

[ellencee]

What is the name of your state? NC

IAAL

John R. Silva was not behind in his support payments; yet, he was found to be in arrears by CSE and had his pay withheld to the point that he only received a net pay of $1.00. He sued the CSE in California and won. If I understood what I read, the issue was that his payments in to CSE had never been distributed for the child's support; and that he was not alone in having his payments held by CSE and not distributed.

I thought it could be the answer the question of whether or not CSE could be sued. I didn't know if it answered ryry's mom's particular situation, though.

 

[nextwife]

Yes, BUT did he then sue CSE???

WAs he then able to sue CSE and win for misplacing the CS funds? These agencies seem to be notorious for not distributing what's recieved, not crediting what's been paid through them, or not adjusting their payments to reflect the current agreements (based on problems I see posted here)

 

[ellencee]

nextwife

Yes; the information I found was from his successful suit in 1998.

I don't pretend to understand all of the ways that case law can be applied to different situations, whether in the same state or in a different state.

The thread started by ryry's mom is now closed, and I think appropriately so; I just thought the Silva case may answer the question of 'can it be done'.

I also thought it was funny that John R. Silva's case was in Los Angeles because the 'Young and The Restless' is a California- based soap with a former character of the attorney, John Sylva! (and whatta hunk!)

 

[I AM ALWAYS LIABLE]

My response:

The "Silva" case is inapplicable to the original question by Ryry. "Silva" was the non-custodial parent, and has rights to sue when money is wrongfully taken out of his paycheck.

A "custodial" parent has no such rights against CSE because the custodial parent is merely the "beneficiary" of such services, and not a "client". In other words, a custodial parent has no "legal standing" to sue CSE for their negligence.

In local child support agency support proceedings, the "client" is the county - - not the custodial parent or child.

Therefore, neither a parent, child nor any other individual who benefits from the services of CSE may state a viable malpractice claim against the local child support agency for alleged negligence in performing its support enforcement services.

That's why Ryry couldn't find any cases that fit her original question. Simply, the beneficiary of services is NOT the client and has no "legal standing" to sue CSE.

If CSE isn't doing their job for the benefit of the "custodial parent," then that custodial parent can file their own "Order to Show Cause" against the non-custodial parent.

That's the answer.

IAAL

 

[ellencee]

Thanks, IAAL!

If I understood correctly, then all persons who are ordered to pay support remain totally responsible for getting the support to the recipient; and the person who is to receive support can only seek a remedy through the courts by suing the person who is to pay support.

If CSE is not attempting to collect the support, then what? can't ryry's mom take it away from CSE and simply keep going to court asking the defendant to 'show cause' each time he is delinquent over a certain amount? can she get a order that states if he is X amount in arrears, then all she has to do is show the sheriff and her ex would be arrested for contempt?

ryry's mom is in the same situation as a lot of others; her ex is apparently willing to starve to death and live in motel rent-by-the-week apartments to keep from paying support; and, she ain't never gonna get a penny from him. Maybe she can get his rear in jail where he can get two or three meals a day, but I doubt he ever complies with the court's orders or with what is morally right in supporting his children. In the meantime, she's gonna worry herself into premature gray hair and a nervous breakdown over this man. I keep trying to tell her.......'cause I like her!... Let the SOB rot and enjoy the great hubby she has now! Hubby is taking care of the kids; they aren't homeless or starving.

 

[I AM ALWAYS LIABLE]

Thanks, IAAL!

If I understood correctly, then all persons who are ordered to pay support remain totally responsible for getting the support to the recipient; and the person who is to receive support can only seek a remedy through the courts by suing the person who is to pay support.

MY RESPONSE: You understood correctly, and that's right - - but only when CSE is unable to perform.



If CSE is not attempting to collect the support, then what?

MY RESPONSE: Remember, CSE is a "benefit". As a state agency, and not unlike all state agencies, their work depends on State funds, tax dollars. Name me one agency of any state that has an abundance of dollars! Remember, people keep having babies and keep getting divorced. There's more of them than there are state employees working for CSE. They can only do "so much" with limited funds, and not enough employees. So, basically, it's not the State's fault that people are having babies without support. As beneficiaries of a "free service", if Momma Bear can't get her money, then Momma Bear can go to court on her own - - and pay for the privilege. CSE attempts to help the worst case scenarios because they need the most help - - and it's those cases that are the one clogging the system!




can't ryry's mom take it away from CSE and simply keep going to court asking the defendant to 'show cause' each time he is delinquent over a certain amount?

MY RESPONSE: Well she, like any other mother, can certainly request that support be removed from CSE but, it's not likely to happen. Once ordered into the system, it takes an act of Congress to get out. But, whether in or out of the system, any mother can take the matter into court herself on an Order to Show Cause Re: Contempt of the Court Order.





can she get a order that states if he is X amount in arrears, then all she has to do is show the sheriff and her ex would be arrested for contempt?

MY RESPONSE: No. Remember, child support, etc. is a Civil matter. Police cannot enforce Civil matters. It only become "Quasi Criminal" in nature when the court finds the non-custodial parent in Contempt of the order - - and then can fine, or jail, or both, the Contemnor.





ryry's mom is in the same situation as a lot of others; her ex is apparently willing to starve to death and live in motel rent-by-the-week apartments to keep from paying support; and, she ain't never gonna get a penny from him.

MY RESPONSE: Well, first of all, "cry me a river" for Ryry. That's not anyone's fault but hers. You can't squeeze blood from a "turnip,". All that can be done is to keep throwing him in jail with Bubba until such time as it sinks into his "school dropout" brain of his that, "maybe this isn't so much fun after all "



Maybe she can get his rear in jail where he can get two or three meals a day, but I doubt he ever complies with the court's orders or with what is morally right in supporting his children.

MY RESPONSE: Can't help that. Read the above response. What can I tell ya?




In the meantime, she's gonna worry herself into premature gray hair and a nervous breakdown over this man.

MY RESPONSE: Gee, that really breaks my heart.



I keep trying to tell her.......'cause I like her!... Let the SOB rot and enjoy the great hubby she has now! Hubby is taking care of the kids; they aren't homeless or starving.

MY RESPONSE: Gee, a happy ending. Maybe Ryry learned a lesson - - Marry someone with an education and money. She must have grown up.


IAAL