Child Support Case Documentation

So when I filed that first motion for the girlfriend's records, and then two weeks later, asked about it the judge stated that it is not up yet. A month after that, as I. asked about the motion again the judge straight out states ohh. I've already denied that motion. As I explained to her that she did not. She then stated, ohh well, I'm denying it now. Is this considered as misconduct by discharge?

So I then filed a reconsideration. for this issue, she again denied it. and stated that my motion is not. correct because I don't understand. So this is what I wrote. and filed Can you tell me if it is wrong? or irrelevant? or improper?IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF COOK COUNTY ILLINOIS COUNTY DEPARTMENT-DOMESTIC RELATIONS DIVISION IN RE THE PARENTAGE OF: ) A.K., J.K., S.K., minor children, ) ) LULA KOROTKOV , ) Petitioner, ) ) No.: 2021D051242 and ) ) NASER BEGANOVIC, ) Respondent. ) MOTION TO RECONSIDER ORDER DENYING DISCOVERY OF RESPONDENT’S HIDDEN BANK ACCOUNT RECORDS FROM BANK OF AMERICA Now Comes the Petitioner, Lula Korotkov, pro se, pursuant to the Illinois Civil Code of Procedure, and respectfully moves this Honorable Court to reconsider its order dated August *, *, denying the Petitioner’s request for discovery of the Respondent’s bank records from the recently discovered hidden bank account at Bank of America. In support of this motion, Petitioner states as follows: *. This case involves ongoing child support proceedings aimed at ensuring accurate child support payments and full coverage of educational expenses in the best interest of my three children. I have diligently sought discovery of Naser’s financial records from his recently discovered second hidden bank account to ensure precise calculation of child support payments and comprehensive coverage of educational expenses. This is to guarantee that my three children receive the proper support they deserve for their well-being and educational needs. *. Being fully aware that Naser was earning under-the-table income and hiding his true monthly earnings, I persistently informed the court. I presented documented evidence demonstrating income cycling, diversion, and concealment, along with proof of inconsistencies in his financial explanations and documentation of the two known sources of his under-the-table income. Despite this, the evidence was dismissed as insufficient on June *, *. *. On June *, *, while at the Daily Center for our pretrial, I properly obtained a stamped subpoena from the circuit clerk, which I then served on Bank of America. *. On July *, *, I became aware that I did, in fact, find Naser’s second hidden bank account at Bank of America. *. As emphasized by Illinois statute and rules, in an ongoing civil case, especially a child support case pertaining to child support payments and full coverage of educational expenses, I have the right to obtain a subpoena from the circuit clerk for Naser’s hidden bank account records. *. The court's ruling, first made on July *, *, LULA is granted leave to issue a Subpoena Duces Tecum to the Bank of America conditioned on the following: a. Said Subpoena shall be returnable to the Court, thus, all the documents in response to the Subpoena shall be sent only to the Honorable Judge Aimen, Courtroom * of the Richard Daley Center, * W Washington St., Chicago, Illinois *; and b. LULA shall provide proper notice to NASER through counsel. and reiterated on August *, *, regarding granting LULA leave to file a subpoena to Bank of America with the following conditions, remains in full force and effect: a. Said subpoena shall be returnable to the court, thus, all the documents in response to the subpoena shall be sent only to the Honorable Judge Aimen, Courtroom * of the Richard Daley Center, * W Washington St., Chicago, Illinois *; and b. LULA shall provide proper notice to NASER through counsel. *. This ruling is in contradiction of Rule *(a), which generally allows for the issuance of subpoenas without needing the judge’s permission, ensuring transparency and review opportunities for the issuing party. The order breaches Rule *(a) by requiring the judge’s permission for a subpoena. *. Additionally, the order contradicts Rule *(b) by implying that I should notify the respondent and his attorney. The responsibility for notification generally lies with the bank, not with the issuing party. *. Furthermore, the order violates Rule *(a) by directing that bank records be sent only to the judge. This contradicts standard practice as per Rule *(a), which calls for transparency and review opportunities for the issuing party. *. I was supposed to receive these bank records on July *, *, to ensure that the child support calculations were based on Naser’s actual monthly income and to guarantee full coverage of educational expenses for the boys, prioritizing their well-being and educational needs. However, these court orders have only helped Naser evade his responsibility. *. Yesterday, August *, *, I spoke with the legal department at Bank of America and was informed that the subpoena for Naser’s hidden bank records has been stalled. They are unable to submit physical records to the court, as they have never encountered such a request in a child support case. *. I also spoke with an attorney who expressed concern about the judge’s orders. He pointed out that these orders seem to place an undue financial burden on the children while preventing me from accessing crucial financial information, as the primary goal of child support is to ensure the well-being and educational needs of the children are met. He also noted how unusual it was for a judge to order that the children apply for student loans while simultaneously denying access to relevant financial records. According to the attorney, these orders appear to be an attempt to prevent me from obtaining necessary financial information and place a financial burden on the children. This clearly indicates that the children’s welfare and educational needs are not being prioritized. He also stated that the children should not be applying for student loans before Naser’s actual income is determined. *. The court orders listed in Ms. Abellar’s drafted order dated August *, *, confirm the accuracy of what the attorney stated to me. *. It’s surprising that the court has overlooked the opposing party’s intentional efforts to deceive, create confusion, and stall the proceedings. They have distorted the judge’s order from June *, *, and secured an emergency order of protection in Kane County based on false and misleading claims. This was done to avoid submitting applications for the Parent PLUS loan, as Naser falsely claimed to have bad credit and to be sixty thousand dollars in debt. *. It’s surprising that this court has not noted that Naser is being investigated by the IRS for falsely claiming the children on his tax returns and manipulating his W2 forms. The same W2 forms that were justified by this court on June 27th, *. *. August *, *, was intended to be our continued pretrial from June *, *, for my motion for reconsideration of child support payments and the inclusion of Naser’s $*,*.* into his income. However, this did not occur. It was not even mentioned, nor is it referenced in Ms. Abellar’s drafted court order. Instead, the date became a hearing for the withdrawal of Ms. Abellar, which also did not happen, although it is mentioned in her drafted court order. *. The court should also note that Naser does, in fact, have the boys’ Social Security numbers on his old copies of his tax returns. It is concerning that this court accepts everything stated by Naser and his attorney without question and without any actual documented evidence. *. As both Ms. Abellar and Naser attempted to blame me for Naser’s failure to submit the Parent PLUS loan application. They falsely claimed that he couldn’t complete the application because I did not provide the boys’ Social Security numbers and school ID numbers. It was quite fascinating to watch their attempt to shift the blame onto me. as the court rules listed in his attorney’s drafted court order clearly demonstrates that Naser is the only one being prioritized. *. The court should also note that the only reason Naser suddenly wants access to school and medical records is because he has been falsely claiming that the children live with him and providing false school fee receipts to the IRS. This means Naser needs the children’s actual birth certificates, Social Security cards, and school enrollment records, which he does not have. The IRS is well aware that he does not have any of these documents in his possession. As I have previously stated, if he were to suddenly provide these documents to the IRS, they would know they were either falsified or illegally obtained. *. As shown in the attached documents, the intention is to impose further financial hardship on the children by forcing them to apply for student loans. This is also evidenced in the documents attached to my motion for clarification. The claim that he will pay *% of the expenses when the boys graduate in four years is false and will never happen. This burden will fall on the boys, as Naser has never been reliable and never will be. This is based on 17 years of experience. Unfortunately, this court is aiding him in achieving this goal. *. I am deeply concerned that the actions of this court have consistently favored the opposing party, to the detriment of my three children. This has led to a significant lack of trust in the court’s ability to prioritize the well-being and educational needs of my children. *. These are my children, and I will continue to fight for their well-being and best interests. *. According to * ILCS */* of the Illinois Compiled Statutes, the duty of support owed to children includes the obligation to provide for the reasonable and necessary physical, mental, and emotional health needs of the children. This statute emphasizes that child support should be based on the needs of the children. *. According to * ILCS */* of the Illinois Compiled Statutes, the court may award sums of money out of the property and income of either or both parties or the estate of a deceased parent, as equity may require, for the educational expenses of any children of the parties. Educational expenses may include, but are not limited to, tuition, fees, housing, medical expenses, reasonable living expenses during the academic year and periods of recess, and the cost of books and other supplies. *. In support of this motion, I have attached the following documents. Exhibit A: Contains an email I received on July *, *, that I forwarded to Ms. Abellar. A text message I received, also on July *, *, through the Talking Parents app. An email I sent to Ms. Abellar on August *, *, with pictures of the police reports. Exhibit B: Contains two text messages received through the Talking Parents app, one on August *, *, and the other on August *, *. WHEREFORE, the Petitioner, Lula Korotkov, respectfully requests that this Honorable Court: *. Reconsider its order dated August *, *, denying the Petitioner’s request for discovery of the Respondent’s bank records from the recently discovered hidden bank account at Bank of America. *. Order that the Respondent’s bank records from the hidden account at Bank of America be sent directly to the Petitioner. *. Ensure that the Respondent’s financial records are made available to the Petitioner to accurately calculate child support payments and ensure full coverage of educational expenses for the children. *. Provide any other relief that this Honorable Court deems just and equitable. Respectfully Submitted, Lula Korotkov Lula Korotkov */*/* Lula Korotkov * N, Central Park Ave Chicago IL, * *-*-* Alisagiana@yahoo.com PRO SE PETITIONERS’ VERIFICATION I, Lula Korotkov, acting Pro Se, under penalties as provided by law pursuant to Illinois Supreme Court Rule * and Section *-* of the Code of Civil Procedure, certify that I have read the foregoing and within the motion. I further state that the allegations contained in the foregoing, and within the motion, are true to the best of my knowledge, information, and belief. I further state that I have provided information which, to the best of my knowledge and belief, is true and correct. This motion is being filed with my consent and as part of my required duties in representing myself. I understand that by signing this verification, I am acknowledging that I am acting with my consent and at my direction and that I have based my actions and statements on the factual information provided by me. Lula Korotkov Pro Se Petitioner * N, Central Park Ave Chicago IL, * *-*-* Alisagiana@yahoo.com Lula Korotkov Lula Korotkov */*/*

But the judge stated that it is improper and is not properly. cited because I don't understand. now based off what was written in my motion it seems that the judge is helping the respondent get away with hiding his income.