Zilly, you're wrong again

[BelizeBreeze]

What is the name of your state? PA for this exercise.

I don't know why you continue to play at understanding but I won't let you off with such a misunderstanding of the law that others may read and think is the case.

This should prove to be a very interesting outcome on Monday. She filed for the paternity case. I have read, yes Beli, what you have pasted in is one of the laws, 60 days within the signing of the form, and one can try to challenge this form up to five years aftre the birth of the child. Virtually, very little cases have been rescinded and were allowed DNA testing. We are in a 25% percentile here, there is a huge possiblity this case will not be heard after the plea motions hearing and will be denied.

This is the reason why I never went down to file. Knowing there was a huge chance we would be denied the chance to allow the DNA testing. The child is 6 years old, will be 7 in November. It seems like it is too late, even with the mother being the one filing to have this acknowledgment form rescinded. Looks like we have no case because of all the time that had went by.

The above was your last quote in your thread and it is patently false, which you would have known if you spent more time actually reading the research available to you instead of trying to tell others how much you know about the law.

I would strongly encourage you to read Clark v. Jeter
486 U.S. 456 (1988) Docket Number: 87-5565 and this time TRY to understand the principles of law it suggest.

The 5 year threshold was found unconstitutional by the U.S. Supreme Court in the above case.

I don't know if you or Mary (she's been VERY busy lately) closed your thread and I'm not doing this to poke fun at you or belittle you in any way. But stating a falsehood as fact does NO ONE a service and, in fact, presents a very big disservice to all those seeking help and reading these threads.

 

[ZILLY]

Read these articles please:

http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cach...+acknowledgment+of+paternity+form+in+pa&hl=en

http://www.aaml.org/Articles/2000-11/UPA FINAL TEXT WITH COMMENTS .htm

http://www.acf.dhhs.gov/programs/cse/pubs/reports/litigation/ch04.html

http://www.kentlaw.edu/honorsscholars/2003students/writings/neff.html

And when I find the one website that listed various states and their statutes to challenge an acknowledgement form,the 5 year statute of law in PA and other states who had statues, I will paste that link in.

I honestly don't think either one of us are right, it solely depends on what the freaking judge wants to do.

I don't think it is right to post that I am wrong to the entire messageboard, you say your not trying to belittle me, but the subject of your post tells otherwise.

And I'm not stating falsehood of fact. I have spent the past 2 hours reading up on this **** and this is what I have read from different law/child support sites and whatever else I could have read in 2 hours. I don't think anyone has a clue what the hell is going on because each website states different statutes on challenging a form, and not one website can tell you what exactly the definition of basis of fraud, duress, or material mistake of fact, because the courts can't even give a good defnition, which is also said on one of the sites I pasted in. It just figures the one website that clearly pointed out the statutes I cannot seem to find now. But I will if it takes me all night.

 

[BelizeBreeze]

Read these articles please:

http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cach...+acknowledgment+of+paternity+form+in+pa&hl=en

http://www.aaml.org/Articles/2000-11/UPA FINAL TEXT WITH COMMENTS .htm

http://www.acf.dhhs.gov/programs/cse/pubs/reports/litigation/ch04.html

http://www.kentlaw.edu/honorsscholars/2003students/writings/neff.html

And when I find the one website that listed various states and their statutes to challenge an acknowledgement form,the 5 year statute of law in PA and other states who had statues, I will paste that link in.

I honestly don't think either one of us are right, it solely depends on what the freaking judge wants to do.

I don't think it is right to post that I am wrong to the entire messageboard, you say your not trying to belittle me, but the subject of your post tells otherwise.

And I'm not stating falsehood of fact. I have spent the past 2 hours reading up on this **** and this is what I have read from different law/child support sites and whatever else I could have read in 2 hours. I don't think anyone has a clue what the hell is going on because each website states different statutes on challenging a form, and not one website can tell you what exactly the definition of basis of fraud, duress, or material mistake of fact, because the courts can't even give a good defnition, which is also said on one of the sites I pasted in. It just figures the one website that clearly pointed out the statutes I cannot seem to find now. But I will if it takes me all night.

One last time and then I don't really care if the judge hands you your ass in a sling or not.

I didn't get this information from a website. YOu can trust other's interpetation of the facts or not. But by your gaining information from websites that's exactly what you are doing.

I got my information from the Pennsylvania state statutes revised 2004 and from the U.S. Supreme court docket. Something you would know how to use if you ever take yourself to a law library and quit trying to find answered on websites.

And I don't care one iota if you think I'm right or not. Because when you find out is the day you attempt taking a child that has not been awarded to you by a court.

Then you'll have 15 to life to think about it.

I'm done with you. Frankly, you're not worth the time or effort.

 

[ZILLY]

One last time and then I don't really care if the judge hands you your ass in a sling or not.

I didn't get this information from a website. YOu can trust other's interpetation of the facts or not. But by your gaining information from websites that's exactly what you are doing.

I got my information from the Pennsylvania state statutes revised 2004 and from the U.S. Supreme court docket. Something you would know how to use if you ever take yourself to a law library and quit trying to find answered on websites.

And I don't care one iota if you think I'm right or not. Because when you find out is the day you attempt taking a child that has not been awarded to you by a court.

Then you'll have 15 to life to think about it.

I'm done with you. Frankly, you're not worth the time or effort.

Funny, because these are actual dockets available ON THE WEB!

I could care less what you think. My initial post was regarding call blocking anyway, not a war on paternity forms.

 

[betterthanher]

Funny, because these are actual dockets available ON THE WEB!

I could care less what you think. My initial post was regarding call blocking anyway, not a war on paternity forms.

Ummm Silly Zilly...

are YOU an attorney. Let me narrow that in even further (because we've had tax attorneys think they know what the hell they're talking about when it comes to family law).

Are you a lawyer who's specialized in Family Law?

Damn...the sound of crickets is deafning.

You are arguing with someone who IS!!

 

[BelizeBreeze]

WELL DAMN!

A cat fight and I wasn't even invited to bring the JELL-O

 

[stealth2]

No catfight.

 

[tigger22472]

Oh My!!

Now, do you want to know how many times I've seen a lower court order something that would be automatically reversed on appeal?

Do you also want to know how many websites I have seen that supposably have statistics that are inaccurate?

What BB was quoting was a case law.

Now, I'm going to give you a little assignment. Tell me what the difference is between a primary and secondary source, then tell me why that is important. Also tell me what constitutes a primary source AND why trial courts aren't generally considered that. Also tell me why you can't 'quote' trial courts as law for another case!

And, just so you know, I too know the game you are playing!

 

[betterthanher]

WELL DAMN!

A cat fight and I wasn't even invited to bring the JELL-O

OK...you can bring the Jello SHOTS!

 

[BelizeBreeze]

Loser.

And an Idiot to boot.

Now, if anyone else would like to see why EITHER the mother OR the father has up to 18 years to contest paternity, read the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Clark v. Jeter .