Happy Birthday Zoraya

Happy Birthday!

We Love You

We Think About You

We Miss You

All the Time!

Happy Birthday DK

Related articles

• Do you support a presumption of equal parental fitness, regardless of gender, being enshrined in law in accordance with the 14th Amendment?
• What Happens When Family Courts Prioritize Parental Rights Over The Rights Of The Child?
• Any Court, Any Judge, Any Attorney, Any Parent who rules or strives to keep a child out of the lives of both of their fit and willing parents should be considered a child abuser.
• Florida Senate passes SB 250 Shared Parenting Bill!
• You're Worth Fighting For!!
• Judicial Accountability for Court Ordered Parental Alienation
• A Year Without My Daughter Zoraya. Here's to you Judge Valerie Manno-Schurr.
• Family Court Stress Disorder (PTSD)...
• Would you support social security title IV D and family law reform? Asks ChangePolitics
• Men's rights movement

The Bomb in the Brain

Linking childhood trauma to long-term health and social consequences.

What is The ACE Study?

The ACE Study is ongoing collaborative research between the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in Atlanta, GA, and Kaiser Permanente in San Diego, CA.

The Co-principal Investigators of The Study are Robert F. Anda, MD, MS, with the CDC; and Vincent J. Felitti, MD, with Kaiser Permanente.

Over 17,000 Kaiser patients participating in routine health screening volunteered to participate in The Study. Data resulting from their participation continues to be analyzed; it reveals staggering proof of the health, social, and economic risks that result from childhood trauma.

Family Court Self-Representatiom

PRO SE RIGHTS

Brotherhood of Trainmen v. Virginia ex rel. Virginia State Bar, 377 U.S. 1; v. Wainwright, 372 U.S. 335; Argersinger v. Hamlin, Sheriff 407 U.S. 425 ~ Litigants can be assisted by unlicensed laymen during judicial proceedings.

Conley v. Gibson, 355 U.S. 41 at 48 (1957) ~ "Following the simple guide of rule 8(f) that all pleadings shall be so construed as to do substantial justice"... "The federal rules reject the approach that pleading is a game of skill in which one misstep by counsel may be decisive to the outcome and accept the principle that the purpose of pleading is to facilitate a proper decision on the merits." The court also cited Rule 8(f) FRCP, which holds that all pleadings shall be construed to do substantial justice.

Davis v. Wechler, 263 U.S. 22, 24; Stromberb v. California, 283 U.S. 359; NAACP v. Alabama, 375 U.S. 449 ~ "The assertion of federal rights, when plainly and reasonably made, are not to be defeated under the name of local practice."

Elmore v. McCammon (1986) 640 F. Supp. 905 ~ "... the right to file a lawsuit pro se is one of the most important rights under the constitution and laws."

Federal Rules of Civil Procedures, Rule 17, 28 USCA "Next Friend" ~ A next friend is a person who represents someone who is unable to tend to his or her own interest.

Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519 (1972) ~ "Allegations such as those asserted by petitioner, however inartfully pleaded, are sufficient"... "which we hold to less stringent standards than formal pleadings drafted by lawyers."

Jenkins v. McKeithen, 395 U.S. 411, 421 (1959); Picking v. Pennsylvania R. Co., 151 Fed 2nd 240; Pucket v. Cox, 456 2nd 233 ~ Pro se pleadings are to be considered without regard to technicality; pro se litigants' pleadings are not to be held to the same high standards of perfection as lawyers.

Maty v. Grasselli Chemical Co., 303 U.S. 197 (1938) ~ "Pleadings are intended to serve as a means of arriving at fair and just settlements of controversies between litigants. They should not raise barriers which prevent the achievement of that end. Proper pleading is important, but its importance consists in its effectiveness as a means to accomplish the end of a just judgment."

NAACP v. Button, 371 U.S. 415); United Mineworkers of America v. Gibbs, 383 U.S. 715; and Johnson v. Avery, 89 S. Ct. 747 (1969) ~ Members of groups who are competent nonlawyers can assist other members of the group achieve the goals of the group in court without being charged with "unauthorized practice of law."

Picking v. Pennsylvania Railway, 151 F.2d. 240, Third Circuit Court of Appeals ~ The plaintiff's civil rights pleading was 150 pages and described by a federal judge as "inept". Nevertheless, it was held "Where a plaintiff pleads pro se in a suit for protection of civil rights, the Court should endeavor to construe Plaintiff's Pleadings without regard to technicalities."

Puckett v. Cox, 456 F. 2d 233 (1972) (6th Cir. USCA) ~ It was held that a pro se complaint requires a less stringent reading than one drafted by a lawyer per Justice Black in Conley v. Gibson (see case listed above, Pro Se Rights Section).

Roadway Express v. Pipe, 447 U.S. 752 at 757 (1982) ~ "Due to sloth, inattention or desire to seize tactical advantage, lawyers have long engaged in dilatory practices... the glacial pace of much litigation breeds frustration with the Federal Courts and ultimately, disrespect for the law."

Sherar v. Cullen, 481 F. 2d 946 (1973) ~ "There can be no sanction or penalty imposed upon one because of his exercise of Constitutional Rights."

Schware v. Board of Examiners, United State Reports 353 U.S. pages 238, 239. ~ "The practice of law cannot be licensed by any state/State."

Sims v. Aherns, 271 SW 720 (1925) ~ "The practice of law is an occupation of common right."

Source:http://stevegartin.com/redress.htm

Nothing in this message or the group's archives should be considered legal advise. Please consult an attorney for that stuff because they claim to know these things and will happily charge you a lot of money for sharing their knowledge and experience.

#takejusticeback

"A Dad's Point-of-View™"

Bruce Sallan - "A Dad's Point-of-View™" Columnist, Speaker, and Blogger

Real Proof of Corruption is Beyond Reasonable Doubt ~ Stare Decisis in Family Courts

Grassroots advocates, public interest attorneys, and legal scholars gathered in October 2011 at the University of Baltimore for the debut symposium of "The Matthew Fogg Symposia On The Vitality of Stare Decisis In America." Convening such a broad and in many ways diverse audience, requires the program series to be worthwhile academically, yet have populist appeal. Towards that end, the event website explains: "It is both scholarly and practical to examine the current vitality of stare decisis as a legal doctrine in America."

POR QUÉ DECIR SÍ A LA CUSTODIA COMPARTIDA

POR QUÉ DECIR SÍ A LA CUSTODIA COMPARTIDA

Disminuye la tristeza y la ansiedad por la pérdida que sufren los niños cuando sus padres se separan; el padre en la custodia compartida no pasa a ser un simple visitador.

Mantiene un contacto estable con toda su red familiar, materna y paterna, importante pilar de apoyo y cariño para el niño.

Desaparecen los conflictos entre adultos por la IGUALDAD que les permite, en el día a día, ejercer su deber como padre/madre, participando en todo lo que tiene que ver con el hijo/a: médico, colegio, actividades, problemas cotidianos, etc.

Desaparecen las maletas, pues hay casos en los que los adultos son los que se mueven al domicilio del niño, aunque la mayoría de las familias necesita dos viviendas en las cuales el niño dispone de todo lo necesario, de forma que no necesite llevar más que libros o similares de forma puntual. Hoy en día, con los regímenes de visitas quincenales + vacaciones de verano + Navidad + semana santa + carnavales, el niño hace constantes cambios con su maleta, pero esto desaparece en el CC porque los dos progenitores tienen el deber de hacer que el niño disponga de todo lo necesario y tenga un espacio propio en casa de mamá y papá.

Beneficia a la famila materna y paterna por extensión, que no tiene que romper los vínculos con los menores, hecho que ocurre hoy en día por el escaso tiempo de visita que tiene el no custodio. Esto mejora los niveles de felicidad y la participación de toda la red familiar del niño.
Reparte y así disminuye la carga de responsabilidad del adulto tradicionalmente custodio, que puede rehacer su vida y continuar con su carrera profesional si lo desea. Esto también aumenta los índices de bienestar familiar y reduce el conflicto.

Reduce la sensación de pérdida del no custodio, en lo referente sobre todo a los hijos (educación, ocio , salud, etc.) y se reduce el sufrimiento emocional.

Reduce el conflicto relativo al reparto de las responsabilidades y respecto a los derechos de las partes, con un diálogo de igual a igual, donde es más sencillo aparcar cuestiones personales y centrarse en el bienestar de los niños. Ambos ejercen la patria potestad, ya que disponen de los medios necesarios (espacio y tiempo). La corresponsabilidad parental se normaliza.

¿Por qué decir NO a que abogados sean elegidos en la Legislatura? Mire explicacion.