TRY ME!
Insurance Removal Legal Concerns
Summary
In Illinois, parents must provide health insurance for minor children if available at a reasonable cost. Removing children from insurance without justification may be seen as neglecting parental responsibilities. If your children were removed from insurance at age 15 and replaced with a girlfriend and her child, this could be concerning. You can request the court to review these actions and ensure the respondent fulfills his obligations. Consider consulting a family law attorney to address this issue.Full Conversation
What would your thoughts be? if you were an attorney and the petitioner came consulting with you and stated that the that's what happened
Hi there! I understand you're seeking a straightforward answer about a legal situation involving child support and insurance beneficiaries. To provide accurate general information:
- Are the biological twin sons still minors and dependents?
- Is there a child support order in place?
These details will help clarify the situation better.
- Are the biological twin sons still minors and dependents?
- Is there a child support order in place?
These details will help clarify the situation better.
When I initially filed for this child support case. are twin biological sons were 14 years old. when there were 15 years old, I received an email from. the respondent state stating that he will be removing the boys from his work insurance because he needs to protect himself from them and replace them with the woman who was his girlfriend at the time and her child. then now our twin biological sons are * so he removed them when they were * I just want to know what would your thoughts be if you are either the attorney representing the petitioner or the judge overseeing this case?
I'm here to help. In Illinois, if the respondent removed the children from his insurance while they were still minors, this could be concerning. Generally, parents are obligated to provide for their minor children, including health insurance, as part of child support. Here are some key points:
- Illinois law requires parents to provide health insurance for their children if available at a reasonable cost.
- Removing children from health insurance without justification may be seen as neglecting parental responsibilities.
It would be advisable to consult with a family law attorney to discuss the specifics of your case and explore potential actions.
- Illinois law requires parents to provide health insurance for their children if available at a reasonable cost.
- Removing children from health insurance without justification may be seen as neglecting parental responsibilities.
It would be advisable to consult with a family law attorney to discuss the specifics of your case and explore potential actions.
Here, for example if I wanna state two. the judge. that the respondent removed our twin sons from his work. health insurance in * when there were * and replaced them with a girlfriend and her child. and when the judge initially set child support based on false Income information provided through it. pretrial memorandum in November of *. The respondent threw his attorney in a pretrial memorandum stated that if the boys and Our daughter were to be placed on the respondents health insurance. It. would raise the price. but in * both of the boys needed braces. and public aid insurance does not cover braces. and the respondent refused to pay out of pocket. So the boys were never able to receive The braces they needed. But my thing here is. was it? proper for the non custodial parent who is the respondent to state that he will be removing the boys. because he needs to protect himself from them. Which is an odd statement for a parent to state while. replacing them with his girlfriend and her child. So I wanna know if you were an attorney represent. the petitioner and you have to state this situation to the judge. How would you accurately do it? What would you state?
If I were an attorney representing the petitioner, I would present the situation to the judge as follows:
"Your Honor, the respondent removed our twin sons from his work health insurance when they were 15 years old, replacing them with his girlfriend and her child. This action was taken despite the boys' need for braces, which public aid insurance did not cover. The respondent's justification that he needed to 'protect himself' from his own children is concerning and appears to neglect his parental responsibilities. Additionally, the respondent's pretrial memorandum contained false income information, which significantly impacted the calculation of child support. We request the court to address these discrepancies and ensure the respondent fulfills his obligations to provide adequate health insurance for his biological children."
"Your Honor, the respondent removed our twin sons from his work health insurance when they were 15 years old, replacing them with his girlfriend and her child. This action was taken despite the boys' need for braces, which public aid insurance did not cover. The respondent's justification that he needed to 'protect himself' from his own children is concerning and appears to neglect his parental responsibilities. Additionally, the respondent's pretrial memorandum contained false income information, which significantly impacted the calculation of child support. We request the court to address these discrepancies and ensure the respondent fulfills his obligations to provide adequate health insurance for his biological children."
You're not understanding me. even though my boys are now *. I still wanna state the response. that removing and his statement via email removing needing to protect himself from his biological children while replacing them with a girlfriend and her child. That doesn't make sense. He needs to protect himself from his children. Biological children. but not protect himself from a girlfriend and her child. This is what I wanna point out. How hard that is. So for 10 year my attorney and you would cite that in a motion. How would you cite it as an attorney?
I understand your concern. If I were an attorney, I would state it as follows in a motion:
"Your Honor, the respondent removed our twin sons from his work health insurance when they were *, replacing them with his girlfriend and her child. His justification, that he needed to 'protect himself' from his own children, is concerning. This action neglects his parental responsibilities and lacks any reasonable justification."
"Your Honor, the respondent removed our twin sons from his work health insurance when they were *, replacing them with his girlfriend and her child. His justification, that he needed to 'protect himself' from his own children, is concerning. This action neglects his parental responsibilities and lacks any reasonable justification."
How would you? say that as? the petitioners attorney. I tell you are the attorney and you are verbally stating that to the judge
Certainly! If I were the petitioner's attorney, I would address the judge as follows:
"Your Honor, the respondent removed our twin sons from his work health insurance when they were 15 years old, replacing them with his girlfriend and her child. He justified this decision by claiming he needed to 'protect himself' from his own biological children, which is a deeply concerning and unreasonable justification. This action neglects his parental responsibilities, especially since the boys needed braces that public aid insurance did not cover and the respondent refused to pay out of pocket. We request the court to consider these actions and ensure that the respondent fulfills his obligations to provide adequate health insurance for his biological children."
If you need further assistance, please let me know!
"Your Honor, the respondent removed our twin sons from his work health insurance when they were 15 years old, replacing them with his girlfriend and her child. He justified this decision by claiming he needed to 'protect himself' from his own biological children, which is a deeply concerning and unreasonable justification. This action neglects his parental responsibilities, especially since the boys needed braces that public aid insurance did not cover and the respondent refused to pay out of pocket. We request the court to consider these actions and ensure that the respondent fulfills his obligations to provide adequate health insurance for his biological children."
If you need further assistance, please let me know!
Also, along with that situation. all the respondents money. has been and was directed to the girlfriend and her five sons. away from his biological children. Now, if you were an attorney and I came to you with this information, for consulting, what would your thoughts and state and statements be on that?
To fully understand and address your situation, I have a question:
- Are you seeking to modify the current child support order based on the respondent's actions and financial decisions?
If so, here are some key points to present in court:
- The respondent redirected his finances to the girlfriend and her children, neglecting his biological children.
- This financial neglect includes removing his sons from health insurance and failing to cover necessary medical expenses.
- His justification for these actions is unreasonable and fails to meet his parental obligations.
Feel free to provide more details or ask further questions!
- Are you seeking to modify the current child support order based on the respondent's actions and financial decisions?
If so, here are some key points to present in court:
- The respondent redirected his finances to the girlfriend and her children, neglecting his biological children.
- This financial neglect includes removing his sons from health insurance and failing to cover necessary medical expenses.
- His justification for these actions is unreasonable and fails to meet his parental obligations.
Feel free to provide more details or ask further questions!
I am asking these questions. because I am curious to know if that is proper or wrong or right Pretend you are the respondent, the non custodial parent and you state that you need to remove your biological sons because you need to protect yourself while you replace them with a girlfriend and her child Would that be correct of you? And also as the respondent you're fu....er children while neglecting your own
I understand your concern. In Illinois, a parent is generally required to provide for their minor children, including health insurance if available reasonably. Removing children from insurance without a valid reason could be seen as neglecting parental responsibilities.
- How did the judge respond to this information when presented?
- How did the judge respond to this information when presented?
It was never mentioned to the judge. that the boys were removed and replaced.
Understood. To address this concern, you should consider presenting the following points to the judge:
- "Your Honor, the respondent removed our twin sons from his work health insurance when they were 15 years old, replacing them with his girlfriend and her child. His justification was to 'protect himself' from his biological children, which is unreasonable and neglectful of his parental responsibilities."
- "Additionally, the respondent prioritized financial support for his girlfriend and her children over his biological sons, who required braces not covered by public aid insurance. We request the court to review these actions and ensure the respondent fulfills his obligations to provide adequate support and health insurance for his biological children."
If you need further guidance on how to proceed, please let me know!
- "Your Honor, the respondent removed our twin sons from his work health insurance when they were 15 years old, replacing them with his girlfriend and her child. His justification was to 'protect himself' from his biological children, which is unreasonable and neglectful of his parental responsibilities."
- "Additionally, the respondent prioritized financial support for his girlfriend and her children over his biological sons, who required braces not covered by public aid insurance. We request the court to review these actions and ensure the respondent fulfills his obligations to provide adequate support and health insurance for his biological children."
If you need further guidance on how to proceed, please let me know!
So let's say that my boys are now *. and I decide to mention this to the judge now. of his actions
Thank you for providing more context. In Illinois, even if your sons are now *, you can still bring up past actions to the judge to show a pattern of neglect or improper behavior.
...
j. Removal of biological twin sons from the respondent's work health insurance at age * and replacement with the girlfriend and her child, despite the twins' need for braces not covered by public aid insurance.
Argument Key Points to Present:
- "Your Honor, the respondent removed our twin sons from his work health insurance when they were *, replacing them with his girlfriend and her child. His justification was to 'protect himself' from his biological children, which is unreasonable and neglectful of his parental responsibilities."
- "Additionally, the respondent prioritized financial support for his girlfriend and her children over his biological sons, who needed braces not covered by public aid insurance. We request the court to review these actions as they reflect on the respondent's failure to adequately support his biological children during their minority."
Would you like to know more about how to file a motion regarding this issue?
- "Your Honor, the respondent removed our twin sons from his work health insurance when they were *, replacing them with his girlfriend and her child. His justification was to 'protect himself' from his biological children, which is unreasonable and neglectful of his parental responsibilities."
- "Additionally, the respondent prioritized financial support for his girlfriend and her children over his biological sons, who needed braces not covered by public aid insurance. We request the court to review these actions as they reflect on the respondent's failure to adequately support his biological children during their minority."
Would you like to know more about how to file a motion regarding this issue?
yes
To file a motion regarding this issue, follow these steps:
- Draft a Motion to Modify Child Support or a Motion for Contempt, highlighting the respondent’s neglect.
- Include detailed points about the insurance removal and financial prioritization of the girlfriend's children.
- File the motion with the family court where the child support order was issued.
Would you like a template for drafting this motion?
- Draft a Motion to Modify Child Support or a Motion for Contempt, highlighting the respondent’s neglect.
- Include detailed points about the insurance removal and financial prioritization of the girlfriend's children.
- File the motion with the family court where the child support order was issued.
Would you like a template for drafting this motion?
Let's say I just wanna. bring that up in this motion.Motion for Reconsideration of Denied Motion to Compel Discovery of Respondent's Spouse's Bank Records and Subpoena if Necessary Regarding Respondent's Concealed Assets
I, [Your Name], the pro se petitioner in this case, respectfully submit this motion for reconsideration of the court's denial of my motion to compel discovery and subpoena the respondent's spouse's bank records. This motion outlines the procedural history, the substantial evidence provided, and the necessity of obtaining these records to ensure a fair and accurate assessment of the respondent's financial situation, which directly impacts the child support obligations for my three biological children.
#### Background
*. **Filing the Motion**: On September *, *, I filed a motion to compel discovery of the respondent's spouse's Huntington Bank records due to substantial financial transactions from the respondent to his spouse.
*. **Judge's Instruction**: On September *, *, the judge instructed me to change the title of the motion and resubmit it, which I did on September *, *.
*. **Court Sessions**: During court sessions on October *, *, and November *, *, the judge and the respondent's attorney provided unclear responses regarding the status of the motion. The judge ultimately denied the motion without discussion or recorded reasoning.
#### Evidence of Hidden Assets and Transactions
I present documented evidence showing significant financial transactions from the respondent to his spouse, including:
a. $*,* in Apple Cash and Zelle payments.
b. A cashier's check for $*,*.
c. Monthly spending between $*,* and $*,*, including large cash withdrawals and deposits.
d. Under-the-table income received via Zelle.
e. Purchase of a townhouse under the spouse's and her son's names with a $*,* down payment from the respondent.
f. Payments for the spouse's mortgage, groceries, bills, shopping, vacations, and vehicles.
g. Evidence of the respondent's false claims about his debt and financial struggles.
h. Recent down payment on another townhouse on September *, *.
i. College Expenses**: Evidence that the respondent is covering college expenses for the spouse's adult sons, while not providing for his own twin sons' college expenses, books, or any related costs.
#### Legal Basis
*. **Illinois Supreme Court Rule *(b)(*)**: The scope of discovery allows for obtaining non-privileged information relevant to the case. The respondent's financial transactions with his spouse are directly relevant to the child support obligations.
*. *** ILCS */***: This statute emphasizes the importance of proper financial support for children. The respondent's concealed assets and financial misconduct directly impact his ability to fulfill his child support obligations.
*. **Illinois Supreme Court Rule ***: This rule provides the procedures for issuing subpoenas to third parties. Obtaining the spouse's bank records is essential to uncovering the respondent's concealed assets and ensuring a fair assessment of his financial situation.
#### Argument
*. **Necessity of Obtaining Spouse's Bank Records**: The respondent's financial transactions with his spouse indicate potential financial misconduct and asset hiding. Obtaining the spouse's Huntington Bank records is crucial for a fair and accurate assessment of the respondent's financial situation.
*. **Impact on Child Support Obligations**: The respondent's financial support for his spouse and her five sons, while neglecting his obligations to his three biological children, is unjust and deprives the children of proper support.
*. **Procedural Irregularities**: The judge's denial of the motion without discussion or recorded reasoning overlooks significant evidence and raises concerns about the fairness of the judicial process.
#### Relief Sought
The petitioner respectfully requests the court to:
*. Reconsider the denial of the motion to compel discovery and subpoena the respondent's spouse's Huntington Bank records.
*. Issue a subpoena if necessary to obtain the bank records.
*. Provide a written explanation for the denial of the initial motion.
*. Ensure that the respondent's financial situation is accurately assessed to provide proper child support for the petitioner's children.
#### Conclusion
The petitioner urges the court to reconsider the substantial evidence presented and grant the motion to compel discovery and subpoena of the respondent's spouse's bank records to ensure a fair and just outcome for the petitioner's children.
Respectfully Submitted,
Lula Korotkov
Lula Korotkov
*/*/*
Lula Korotkov
* N, Central Park Ave
Chicago IL, *
*-*-*
Alisagiana@yahoo.com
PRO SE PETITIONER’S 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
*/*/*
To incorporate the issue of removing your sons from health insurance into your motion, you could add a section under "Evidence of Hidden Assets and Transactions" or "Argument." Here's an example:
Evidence of Hidden Assets and Transactions...
j. Removal of biological twin sons from the respondent's work health insurance at age * and replacement with the girlfriend and her child, despite the twins' need for braces not covered by public aid insurance.
...
*. **Improper Removal from Health Insurance**: The respondent removed his biological twin sons from his work health insurance at age *, replacing them with his girlfriend and her child. His justification to 'protect himself' from his own children is unreasonable and neglectful of his parental responsibilities.
This inclusion highlights the respondent's neglect and strengthens your argument for reconsideration. If you need further assistance, please let me know!
Let me ask you this in a different way Let's say you are the attorney. Let's say you are an actual attorney. and you hear of the respondents action. What would your first reaction or thoughts be on that situation?
In Illinois, removing minor children from health insurance without valid justification would be seen as neglecting parental responsibilities. My first reaction would be:
- Concern over neglect of parental duties.
- Questioning the justification of "protecting himself" from his own children.
- Noting the impact on the children’s health needs, such as braces.
Would you like further guidance on how to present this to the judge?
- Concern over neglect of parental duties.
- Questioning the justification of "protecting himself" from his own children.
- Noting the impact on the children’s health needs, such as braces.
Would you like further guidance on how to present this to the judge?
yes
Certainly! To present this to the judge clearly, you would emphasize the respondent's neglect and unreasonable justification. Here's an example of how you might address the judge:
~Your Honor, the respondent removed our twin sons from his work health insurance when they were only 15 years old, replacing them with his girlfriend and her child. His stated reason was to 'protect himself' from his own biological children, which is deeply concerning and unreasonable. This action neglected his parental responsibilities, especially since the boys needed braces that public aid insurance did not cover and the respondent refused to pay out of pocket. We request the court to review these actions and ensure that the respondent fulfills his obligations to provide adequate support and health insurance for his biological children.
If you need further assistance in drafting or presenting your motion, please let me know!
If you need further assistance in drafting or presenting your motion, please let me know!
Now, my other question to you is. if I were to request. that the respondent put all three of three of his biological children on his work insurance or whatever it's called meaning. putting his twin sons back, plus our daughter even though our boys are now 19 years old. and our daughter is 16 years old.
To address your request in Illinois:
- Generally, parents are required to provide health insurance for minor children if available at a reasonable cost.
- Since your twin sons are now *, they may not be covered under a standard child support order but could be included if they are still dependents (e.g., in college).
- Your daughter, being *, should be covered under the respondent’s work insurance.
Would you like guidance on how to request this in a motion?
- Generally, parents are required to provide health insurance for minor children if available at a reasonable cost.
- Since your twin sons are now *, they may not be covered under a standard child support order but could be included if they are still dependents (e.g., in college).
- Your daughter, being *, should be covered under the respondent’s work insurance.
Would you like guidance on how to request this in a motion?
The boys are in college, and my daughter is a. well, my boys are freshmen in college, and my daughter is a sophomore in high school.
Thank you for the additional information. In Illinois, you can request that your ex-spouse include all three children on his work insurance due to their dependent statuses.
Key Points to Include in Your Motion:
- **Age and Status**: "Your Honor, our twin sons are college freshmen and our daughter is a high school sophomore."
- **Health Insurance Requirement**: "We request that the respondent include all three children on his work health insurance, as they are dependents and in need of coverage."
Would you like a template for drafting this request in your motion?
- **Age and Status**: "Your Honor, our twin sons are college freshmen and our daughter is a high school sophomore."
- **Health Insurance Requirement**: "We request that the respondent include all three children on his work health insurance, as they are dependents and in need of coverage."
Would you like a template for drafting this request in your motion?
I wanna point out and highlights the concerning situation that a father would make. That need to protect himself from his biological sons. and replacing them with a girlfriend and her child. that is concerning to me. this I wanna use this as a way to highlight the girl. or spouses interference with my children's well being and financial security. as she had him replace his biological children with herself and her son. All his income is directed to her. and away from his children. This plays huge roles in the retroactive child support and the proper child support amount that should have been ordered for all three of my children and with the proper child support amount for my daughter moving forward and the proper amount of college expenses that should have been covered out of the father's pocket told towards his biological children. That's the girlfriend and her children
To address your concerns in a motion, you can highlight the father's neglect and misallocation of funds affecting your children's well-being and financial security. Here's a template for your motion:
Motion for Reconsideration and Proper Child Support Allocation
**Background:**
- The respondent removed our twin sons from his work health insurance at age *, replacing them with his girlfriend and her child.
- The respondent's justification was to "protect himself" from his biological children, which is unreasonable and neglectful.
- The twin sons, now *, are college freshmen, and our daughter, *, is a high school sophomore.
**Key Points:**
*. **Neglect of Parental Responsibilities:**
- The respondent's removal of his biological children from health insurance neglected their health needs, such as braces not covered by public aid.
- The respondent's justification of "protecting himself" from his own children is deeply concerning and unreasonable.
*. **Misallocation of Financial Resources:**
- The respondent has directed his income towards his girlfriend and her children, neglecting his financial obligations to his biological children.
- This misallocation has affected the proper calculation and fulfillment of child support and college expenses for our children.
*. **Request for Proper Support:
**Background:**
- The respondent removed our twin sons from his work health insurance at age *, replacing them with his girlfriend and her child.
- The respondent's justification was to "protect himself" from his biological children, which is unreasonable and neglectful.
- The twin sons, now *, are college freshmen, and our daughter, *, is a high school sophomore.
**Key Points:**
*. **Neglect of Parental Responsibilities:**
- The respondent's removal of his biological children from health insurance neglected their health needs, such as braces not covered by public aid.
- The respondent's justification of "protecting himself" from his own children is deeply concerning and unreasonable.
*. **Misallocation of Financial Resources:**
- The respondent has directed his income towards his girlfriend and her children, neglecting his financial obligations to his biological children.
- This misallocation has affected the proper calculation and fulfillment of child support and college expenses for our children.
*. **Request for Proper Support:
Now I have a different question how are? or funny? Is it that the respondents attorney would drew from representing him in this case and has now filed a motion request? almost $*? While I filed a motion for a retroactive child support. requesting that the respondent pay the proper retro child support starting from April * * Along with requesting that he be. ordered to pay the proper child support he should have been paying for all three of our children and the proper child support He. should be paying for our daughter going forward.
I understand your concern. In Illinois, it is typically expected that both parents provide financial support for their children. Here are some points regarding your situation:
- The respondent's attorney withdrawing and requesting fees is a separate issue but can be addressed in your motion.
- You can file a motion for retroactive child support and request an appropriate amount based on the respondent's financial situation.
Could you provide more details about the attorney's withdrawal and their fee request to give specific guidance?
- The respondent's attorney withdrawing and requesting fees is a separate issue but can be addressed in your motion.
- You can file a motion for retroactive child support and request an appropriate amount based on the respondent's financial situation.
Could you provide more details about the attorney's withdrawal and their fee request to give specific guidance?
I just wanna know how odd or funny it is. that the respondent is now in this situation where his own attorney filed a motion against him.
It is quite unusual for an attorney to withdraw and then file a motion to collect fees from their client. Here are some key points to consider:
- **Attorney Withdrawal:** This can happen for various reasons, including non-payment of fees or irreconcilable differences.
- **Fee Motion:** Attorneys are entitled to seek payment for services rendered, even after withdrawal.
Would you like guidance on how to address this in your motion for child support?
- **Attorney Withdrawal:** This can happen for various reasons, including non-payment of fees or irreconcilable differences.
- **Fee Motion:** Attorneys are entitled to seek payment for services rendered, even after withdrawal.
Would you like guidance on how to address this in your motion for child support?
I just wanna know how odd or funny that is. because I find it hilarious.
It is indeed unusual and somewhat ironic for an attorney to withdraw from a case and then file a motion against their own client for fees. This situation often indicates significant issues between the attorney and the client, such as non-payment or serious disagreements. If you need further assistance, feel free to ask!
His attorney filed a motion to withdraw, which was granted right after I filed my motion for a retroactive. And then she filed the. motion. against the respondent for fees. Which I found hilarious? as it seems, it is not going well for the respondt
I understand your perspective. It is indeed ironic and unusual for an attorney to withdraw and then file a motion for fees right after a motion for retroactive child support has been filed. This situation often points to underlying conflicts or issues. If you need further legal information or assistance with your case, please let me know!
Now let's say that the judge grants the attorney's motion for her $* request against. a respondent, while denying my motion from the girlfriend's records, was concealing the respondents money And denying the proper child support payments and retro.
It sounds like a challenging situation. In Illinois, if the judge grants the attorney's motion for fees but denies your motion regarding the respondent's concealed assets and proper child support, you may consider the following steps:
*. **File a Motion for Reconsideration**:
- Highlight the importance of obtaining the girlfriend's financial records to ensure a fair assessment of the respondent's financial situation.
- Emphasize the impact on your children's well-being and financial security.
*. **Appeal the Decision**:
- If you believe the denial was unjust, you may appeal the judge's decision to a higher court.
*. **Consult with a Family Law Attorney**:
- Professional legal advice can help you navigate the complexities of your case and increase your chances of a favorable outcome.
Would you like more detailed guidance on filing a motion for reconsideration or appealing the decision?
*. **File a Motion for Reconsideration**:
- Highlight the importance of obtaining the girlfriend's financial records to ensure a fair assessment of the respondent's financial situation.
- Emphasize the impact on your children's well-being and financial security.
*. **Appeal the Decision**:
- If you believe the denial was unjust, you may appeal the judge's decision to a higher court.
*. **Consult with a Family Law Attorney**:
- Professional legal advice can help you navigate the complexities of your case and increase your chances of a favorable outcome.
Would you like more detailed guidance on filing a motion for reconsideration or appealing the decision?
When I ask that question, I wanna know your opinion. Now, if you're an attorney, what would your initial. first thoughts beyond that type of situation. If it were to happen.
If I were an attorney, my initial thoughts on this situation would be:
- **Concerns about Fairness:** The judge granting the attorney's fee motion while denying critical evidence for child support could indicate an imbalance in the case handling.
- **Strategic Response:** Consider filing a motion for reconsideration to emphasize the necessity of the girlfriend's financial records.
- **Possible Appeal:** Evaluate the grounds for appealing the judge's decision to ensure thorough review and fairness.
- **Concerns about Fairness:** The judge granting the attorney's fee motion while denying critical evidence for child support could indicate an imbalance in the case handling.
- **Strategic Response:** Consider filing a motion for reconsideration to emphasize the necessity of the girlfriend's financial records.
- **Possible Appeal:** Evaluate the grounds for appealing the judge's decision to ensure thorough review and fairness.
What I don't get either, even though I find it hilarious and entertaining that his attorney withdrew. and filed a motion for $* against the respondent in this child support case. but at the same time, I find it odd.
It is indeed unusual and somewhat ironic for an attorney to withdraw from a case and then file a motion for fees against their own client. This often indicates serious issues, such as non-payment or significant disagreements between the attorney and client. If you need further assistance or have more questions, feel free to ask!
Start a new chat