Opportunity to be heard and defend my private Liberty Interest

[tranquility]

The gist of all this (in legal terms) is the OP believes the court denied her her right to due process because it didn't have a fact finding hearing.

Due process, as a constitutional issue, does not require such a hearing. What it does require is allowing a person to be heard. The OP was heard and was denied standing in this case. (At least that is my assumption regarding the court's decision(s).)

The OP will have to prove the court is wrong as a matter of law. (This will not happen in this type of situation as there is a balancing test.) Or, the OP will have to prove that no court could come to this decision. (A very high bar to a successful appeal.)

 

[roseannlee50]

Proserpina Hello?

I would like to thank you all for your opinions and advise in this Post, however, this being an extraordinary matter involving child custody and a non-parent litigant (me) I am indeed entitled to due process, oppertunity to be heard, present facts on the record and give legal arguement even though I am not an attorney, and I have not been provided that constitutional right of which the Judge clearly abused his power of authority in denying me equal rights in this hearing period.

 

[Proserpina]

I would like to thank you all for your opinions and advise in this Post, however, this being an extraordinary matter involving child custody and a non-parent litigant (me) I am indeed entitled to due process, oppertunity to be heard, present facts on the record and give legal arguement even though I am not an attorney, and I have not been provided that constitutional right of which the Judge clearly abused his power of authority in denying me equal rights in this hearing period.

You don't have equal rights. In fact, you currently have no inherent rights to this child, at all. Your Constitutional rights have not been abused. I'm honestly not sure why you're not understanding that very basic point.

Please, speak to an attorney.

 

[roseannlee50]

The third Party non parent litigant in child custody

State of Louisiana
I was made a party because I was a person acting as a parent, plus I had physical custody and established a parent-child relationship with the child, due to the fact she was cared for by me without benefit of the traditional family autonomy one would find in the normal household .
I am currently requesting a rehearing on my appeal based on facts and law which I hope to win.
Children are the issue in child custody disputes and the court needs to focus on the "best interest of the child" not the desires of the parties period and that did not happen in this particular case will update later.
I should have been recognized as this childs "parent in fact" from the begining but it was all about that $674.00 a month child support, the father never wanted the child he just didn't want to pay support, all about money and now after two years(24) months this poor kid has behavior problems such a adhd, bipolar/schizo according to dad and this just in the last 60 days.
Yep the trial court sure did consider the best interest of the child here. NOT

 

[Proserpina]

State of Louisiana
I was made a party because I was a person acting as a parent, plus I had physical custody and established a parent-child relationship with the child, due to the fact she was cared for by me without benefit of the traditional family autonomy one would find in the normal household .
I am currently requesting a rehearing on my appeal based on facts and law which I hope to win.
Children are the issue in child custody disputes and the court needs to focus on the "best interest of the child" not the desires of the parties period and that did not happen in this particular case will update later.
I should have been recognized as this childs "parent in fact" from the begining but it was all about that $674.00 a month child support, the father never wanted the child he just didn't want to pay support, all about money and now after two years(24) months this poor kid has behavior problems such a adhd, bipolar/schizo according to dad and this just in the last 60 days.
Yep the trial court sure did consider the best interest of the child here. NOT

Sigh.

You haven't read a single word, have you?

 

[Antigone*]

Sigh.

You haven't read a single word, have you?

Nope and you've been oh so kind. I think I should buy you a drink

 

[Proserpina]

Nope and you've been oh so kind. I think I should buy you a drink

That would be lovely!

I'm going to try and point out one of the biggest flaws in the OP's argument. I'll try one more time to explain.

This OP is not, and never was, the parent. The courts are generally consistent in awarding de facto parent standing to a third party - certainly in cases where there IS a legal parent remaining - only when there is no other legal remedy available to that third party.

In this case, there was indeed another remedy, and the OP was awarded visitation accordingly.

There was clearly no error in the law, and the judge made the correct ruling in accordance with the law.

This OP may face sanctions if she doesn't get her head out of her...the clouds.

 

[roseannlee50]

lack of integrity within family courts

Louisiana
What a shame that there is so much corruption within family courts in the state of Louisiana. The best Interest of the child should be the determintive factor, but unfortunately it is not.
The trier of fact does not care about the child s wellbeing or emotional stability and happiness in Louisiana and that is pitiful. The trier of fact only cares about the Father period, not the facts evidence or pertinant law which apply's to a particular case. In this case there has been a manifest injustice committed against this child and due to the failure of the court to apply the UCCJEA and exclusion of meritorius claims of a third party and testimony of the Mother what a joke. This Judge clearly abused his power of authority and the child suffers major emotional and mental abuse because of it, yep I sure call this type of Judicial corruption manifest injustice.
Just so you all know this child was a happy, well behaved normal child all her life and in the past 30 days has been placed on ridilyn and psychotic drugs for being bipolar schizo, and ADHD. Plus the dad didnt even bother to include me or Mom in these mental health evaluations and excluded us period this poor little girl. I blame the trial court

 

[Proserpina]

Louisiana
What a shame that there is so much corruption within family courts in the state of Louisiana. The best Interest of the child should be the determintive factor, but unfortunately it is not.
The trier of fact does not care about the child s wellbeing or emotional stability and happiness in Louisiana and that is pitiful. The trier of fact only cares about the Father period, not the facts evidence or pertinant law which apply's to a particular case. In this case there has been a manifest injustice committed against this child and due to the failure of the court to apply the UCCJEA and exclusion of meritorius claims of a third party and testimony of the Mother what a joke. This Judge clearly abused his power of authority and the child suffers major emotional and mental abuse because of it, yep I sure call this type of Judicial corruption manifest injustice.
Just so you all know this child was a happy, well behaved normal child all her life and in the past 30 days has been placed on ridilyn and psychotic drugs for being bipolar schizo, and ADHD. Plus the dad didnt even bother to include me or Mom in these mental health evaluations and excluded us period this poor little girl. I blame the trial court

You're clearly not qualified to make any sort of medical or psychiatric diagnosis.

I wish you'd understand what you're being told. Truly.

 

[davew128]

I blame the trial court

I blame your ho, I mean daughter.

 

[ecmst12]

You are right, the judge/court cares about the constitutional rights of the child's parents. As in, mom and dad NOT any third parties including you.