Opportunity to be heard and defend my private Liberty Interest

[tranquility]

I have earned the right to claim a parental status to this child being her primary caregiver most of her life.

Even though there is no "right" involved here, you already DID claim. The judge decided against you.

It's your information, you should probably know it.

 

[roseannlee50]

Let me correct you here

I suggest you hire a lawyer to have the judge removed from the bench, for abusing his judicial powers, if you believe that to be the case. Ummm, you were getting child support, because you were guardian of the child, not because you were a "defacto parent".

I was getting child support because I was the custodial party and yes I was legal Guardian of the child.
So apparently you believe that biology should be the controling factor here then, even though there is lacking any form of relationship between the father and child.
Even though the child had no relationship what so ever with the father by his choice, when she lived in Indiana for the first 4 years of her life?
I brought the child here to SHARE her with her paternal family, not to be blackballed from her life, alienated from her and her from me this is wrong, cruel, and very very cold hearted.
I filed a petition to establish my status as the child's de facto parent/custodian which the judge dismissed without a hearing, the judge also dismissed the fact that the childs mother clearly testified to the FACT I am the child's parent and I have been Mother to the child not the birth Mother who is my daughter, all her life.
The judge was clearly wrong and I believe that my constitutional rights may have been violated because of it.

 

[Just Blue]

I was getting child support because I was the custodial party and yes I was legal Guardian of the child.
So apparently you believe that biology should be the controling factor here then, even though there is lacking any form of relationship between the father and child.
Even though the child had no relationship what so ever with the father by his choice, when she lived in Indiana for the first 4 years of her life?
I brought the child here to SHARE her with her paternal family, not to be blackballed from her life, alienated from her and her from me this is wrong, cruel, and very very cold hearted.
I filed a petition to establish my status as the child's de facto parent/custodian which the judge dismissed without a hearing, the judge also dismissed the fact that the childs mother clearly testified to the FACT I am the child's parent and I have been Mother to the child not the birth Mother who is my daughter, all her life.
The judge was clearly wrong and I believe that my constitutional rights may have been violated because of it.

Did you adopt this child? No? Then you are NOT the "mother". You are a grandparent that stepped in and cared for said child because YOUR child would not or could not.

 

[tranquility]

The judge was clearly wrong and I believe that my constitutional rights may have been violated because of it.

Stop with the constitutional right argument. It is silly and has no basis in reality.

The judge clearly disagreed with you. Your options are to appeal on the law, which will be completely unsuccessful, or on the facts. The facts is your only chance, but your burden is to prove NO court could find as the judge did.

Good luck.

 

[roseannlee50]

You have no constitutional rights to parent. The child's father -- the man your daughter had sex with and allowed to impregnate her without benefit of marriage -- has constitutional rights.

Oh and pulling up the garbage of PAS won't work. Unless of course you like to align yourself with a pedophile madman who killed himself with a butcher knife.

Really? We see how much of an IQ you are representing here for sure. we will see how this all pans out in the long run.
Oh and by the way, the Judge is clearly prejudice against me personally, and cares not a bit about the best interest of the child in this case.
Oh and the guy who impregnated my daughter was a married man by the way.
Facts are facts and law is law and that is what I am counting on, right is right and wrong is wrong and the decision was clearly wrong and unreasonable

 

[Gail in Georgia]

"Oh and the guy who impregnated my daughter was a married man by the way."

Doesn't say much for the type of class your daughter has, does it?

Gail

 

[Just Blue]

Really? We see how much of an IQ you are representing here for sure. we will see how this all pans out in the long run.
Oh and by the way, the Judge is clearly prejudice against me personally, and cares not a bit about the best interest of the child in this case.
Oh and the guy who impregnated my daughter was a married man by the way.
Facts are facts and law is law and that is what I am counting on, right is right and wrong is wrong and the decision was clearly wrong and unreasonable

OhioGAL is a site varified attorney and Guardian Ad Litum. And your daughter was knocking knees with a married man. She is just as bad as he. You must be very proud to have raised such a...lovely...woman.

 

[roseannlee50]

There was never a hearing

There was never a fact finding hearing had in this extraordinary case and the Judge denied me any form of legal arguement, or opportunity to present facts and effectively participate in this matter, dismissed my petitions without hearing and failed to address the fact that the child was in my physical custody, prior to commencement of this matter, as well as at the time the "Stipulation was had, yet never memorialized into the written judgment as such, but signed and approved by the Judge as a considered decree, which was clearly unethical and in bad faith.
My right to due process and opportunity to be heard and defend my interests in this particular child was never upheld by the court and I am entitled to a fair hearing by an impartial tribunal period.
In this matter I am indeed entitled to be recognized as a De Facto Parent/Custodian to this child and it is my intention to do just that through the facts and law pertaing to this particular child custody case.

 

[Zigner]

In this matter I am indeed entitled to be recognized as a De Facto Parent/Custodian to this child ...

So sayeth you...

 

[roseannlee50]

OhioGAL is a site varified attorney and Guardian Ad Litum. And your daughter was knocking knees with a married man. She is just as bad as he. You must be very proud to have raised such a...lovely...woman.

For an attorney you sure do lack expertise and tact in the name calling, and um FYI you have no clue, I love my kids, and I am NOT responciple for their actions or non action and as a parent we can only pray for our children and hope they have the ability to make good choices and have good judgment in their actions.
Lastly are you jealous of my daughters former relationship with this loser?

 

[CSO286]

For an attorney you sure do lack expertise and tact in the name calling, and um FYI you have no clue, I love my kids, and I am NOT responciple for their actions or non action and as a parent we can only pray for our children and hope they have the ability to make good choices and have good judgment in their actions.
Lastly are you jealous of my daughters former relationship with this loser?

Blue never claimed to be an attorney.

Did you read the TOS?

You've had responses from an attorney who specializes in family law and is a GAL, her advice--and the other advice you've received--is legally accurate.

 

[Just Blue]

For an attorney you sure do lack expertise and tact in the name calling, and um FYI you have no clue, I love my kids, and I am NOT responciple for their actions or non action and as a parent we can only pray for our children and hope they have the ability to make good choices and have good judgment in their actions.
Lastly are you jealous of my daughters former relationship with this loser?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Blue Meanie
OhioGAL is a site varified attorney and Guardian Ad Litum. And your daughter was knocking knees with a married man. She is just as bad as he. You must be very proud to have raised such a...lovely...woman.

Huh?????????????

 

[OHRoadwarrior]

Let me correct you here

How can you correct me, when you agreed you were only legally the guardian as I said? I want some of what you have.

 

[Proserpina]

Evidently you haven't done your homework, a de facto parent/custodian under the UCJEA is a person acting as a parent to a child for a substantial period of time and who has established a parent/child relationship with the child absent the traditional family unit. Which in fact I did. I have earned the right to claim a parental status to this child being her primary caregiver most of her life. You really need to back up and get your information right here

I'd reread the LAWS if I were you, Madam.

You have no idea what you're talking about. Clearly.



(Or did you simply not grasp what was written? That may explain your attitude, I suppose)

 

[Proserpina]

I was getting child support because I was the custodial party and yes I was legal Guardian of the child.
So apparently you believe that biology should be the controling factor here then, even though there is lacking any form of relationship between the father and child.
Even though the child had no relationship what so ever with the father by his choice, when she lived in Indiana for the first 4 years of her life?
I brought the child here to SHARE her with her paternal family, not to be blackballed from her life, alienated from her and her from me this is wrong, cruel, and very very cold hearted.
I filed a petition to establish my status as the child's de facto parent/custodian which the judge dismissed without a hearing, the judge also dismissed the fact that the childs mother clearly testified to the FACT I am the child's parent and I have been Mother to the child not the birth Mother who is my daughter, all her life.
The judge was clearly wrong and I believe that my constitutional rights may have been violated because of it.

Allow ME to correct YOU, Madam.

Once again, there WAS a remedy available to you - and you were granted relief based upon that remedy.

You did not, and do not, have ANY constitutional rights to this child.