Portland-area couple sues Legacy Health for $3 million for 'wrongful birth' after child born with Down syndrome | OregonLive.com:
On the June 2007 day their daughter was born, Ariel and Deborah Levy were overcome with excitement, then shock when hospital staff told them their daughter looked like she had Down syndrome.
Isabella Brooke Knightly and Austin Gamez-Knightly
In Memory of my Loving Husband, William F. Knightly Jr. Murdered by ILLEGAL Palliative Care at a Nashua, NH Hospital
Friday, March 9, 2012
Texas child welfare takes custody of 2 children living in abandoned bus
Texas child welfare takes custody of 2 children living in abandoned bus- The New Haven Register - Serving New Haven, Connecticut:
SPLENDORA, Texas — Child welfare officials have taken two children into custody after finding them living on their own in an abandoned bus northeast of Houston.
SPLENDORA, Texas — Child welfare officials have taken two children into custody after finding them living on their own in an abandoned bus northeast of Houston.
Foster Parents Accused Of Killing Child Arrested In Mexico
Foster Parents Accused Of Killing Child Arrested In Mexico - Bakersfield News Story - KERO Bakersfield:
"BAKERSFIELD, Calif. -- A Bakersfield couple accused of murdering a 3-year-old girl under their care in 2010 have been arrested in Mexico."
"BAKERSFIELD, Calif. -- A Bakersfield couple accused of murdering a 3-year-old girl under their care in 2010 have been arrested in Mexico."
NC Deportation Case Highlights Child Welfare Maze
NC Deportation Case Highlights Child Welfare Maze | Fox News:
Read more:
RALEIGH, N.C. – When immigration agents deported Felipe Montes to Mexico two years ago, his three young sons were left in the care of their mentally ill, American-born mother in a small North Carolina mountain town.
Despite immigration policies that allow for the release of primary caregivers, federal authorities worked swiftly to expel Montes. Within two weeks, social workers placed the boys in foster care.
Read more:
Rick Santorum To Single Mothers: Government Paternity Tests Or No Welfare
Rick Santorum To Single Mothers: Government Paternity Tests Or No Welfare:
Tell that to the babystealers and Judges who refuse REAL father's Paternity Testing and custody of their children. Also, stop CPS from fraudulently signing applications for Title IV funding for parent's who don't want or need State Welfare!
WASHINGTON -- GOP presidential contender Rick Santorum has yet to deliver a substantial blow to Mitt Romney's rival campaign. In the past two pivotal primary contests in battleground states, the former senator from Pennsylvania fell short, losing by squeaker margins in Michigan and Ohio. He may owe those defeats to his women problem.
Tell that to the babystealers and Judges who refuse REAL father's Paternity Testing and custody of their children. Also, stop CPS from fraudulently signing applications for Title IV funding for parent's who don't want or need State Welfare!
WASHINGTON -- GOP presidential contender Rick Santorum has yet to deliver a substantial blow to Mitt Romney's rival campaign. In the past two pivotal primary contests in battleground states, the former senator from Pennsylvania fell short, losing by squeaker margins in Michigan and Ohio. He may owe those defeats to his women problem.
Isn't NH LARC SUPPOSED To Be For Low Income Litigant's?
Isn't NH LARC SUPPOSED To Be For Low Income Litigant's?
Then why isn't it?
A married woman, with pending divorce and custody proceeding's, who can not afford an Attorney, is told by the NH Judge handling her divorce case to contact NH Legal Assistance/LARC to retain an Attorney. After week's of trying to make contact, she finally makes contact, but when her child's name is mentioned, she's told there's a conflict of interest and they can't help her.
She's in shock. How can there be a conflict of interest when her estranged husband own's his own house, his own business and three new vehicles? Do they honestly consider him to be low income?
So because this man is obviously receiving free legal assistance and clearly doesn't need it, his very low income wife has to go without legal assistance? Where is the fairness and justice in NH when low income litigant's can't obtain low income legal assistance, but their estranged spouses who have it all can?
This scenario reminds me of another tale of this same kind of injustice in NH. A divorced couple fighting over the custody of their child, were both given court-appointed Lawyer's. The injustice here was the mother was low income, but the father's income was over 100K a year. Now why in the world would a Judge in the NH Judicial system grant the father a court-appointed Lawyer when the father has plenty of money to pay for his own? The father and mother don't live together and by law, this should never have happened. The Judge just kept on letting the State keep footing the bill for a man illegally.
Where is the justice in NH? Why hasn't this Judge been reprimanded? Our NH tax dollars at work!
Why are these people who don't need low income legal assistance receiving it and the low income people of NH being pushed aside?
Then why isn't it?
A married woman, with pending divorce and custody proceeding's, who can not afford an Attorney, is told by the NH Judge handling her divorce case to contact NH Legal Assistance/LARC to retain an Attorney. After week's of trying to make contact, she finally makes contact, but when her child's name is mentioned, she's told there's a conflict of interest and they can't help her.
She's in shock. How can there be a conflict of interest when her estranged husband own's his own house, his own business and three new vehicles? Do they honestly consider him to be low income?
So because this man is obviously receiving free legal assistance and clearly doesn't need it, his very low income wife has to go without legal assistance? Where is the fairness and justice in NH when low income litigant's can't obtain low income legal assistance, but their estranged spouses who have it all can?
This scenario reminds me of another tale of this same kind of injustice in NH. A divorced couple fighting over the custody of their child, were both given court-appointed Lawyer's. The injustice here was the mother was low income, but the father's income was over 100K a year. Now why in the world would a Judge in the NH Judicial system grant the father a court-appointed Lawyer when the father has plenty of money to pay for his own? The father and mother don't live together and by law, this should never have happened. The Judge just kept on letting the State keep footing the bill for a man illegally.
Where is the justice in NH? Why hasn't this Judge been reprimanded? Our NH tax dollars at work!
Why are these people who don't need low income legal assistance receiving it and the low income people of NH being pushed aside?
Fraud upon the court
Statute of limitations - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia:
Fraud upon the court
In the United States, when an officer of the court is found to have fraudulently presented facts to court so that the court is impaired in the impartial performance of its legal task, the act, known as "fraud upon the court", is a crime deemed so severe and fundamentally opposed to the operation of justice that it is not subject to any statute of limitation.
Officers of the court include: lawyers, judges, referees, and those appointed; guardian ad litem, parenting time expeditors, mediators, rule 114 neutrals, evaluators, administrators, special appointees, and any others whose influence are part of the judicial mechanism.
"Fraud upon the court" has been defined by the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals to "embrace that species of fraud which does, or attempts to, defile the court itself, or is a fraud perpetrated by officers of the court so that the judicial machinery can not perform in the usual manner its impartial task of adjudging cases that are presented for adjudication". Kenner v. C.I.R., 387 F.3d 689 (1968); 7 Moore's Federal Practice, 2d ed., p. 512, ¶ 60.23
In Bullock v. United States, 763 F.2d 1115, 1121 (10th Cir. 1985), the court stated "Fraud upon the court is fraud which is directed to the judicial machinery itself and is not fraud between the parties or fraudulent documents, false statements or perjury. ... It is where the court or a member is corrupted or influenced or influence is attempted or where the judge has not performed his judicial function --- thus where the impartial functions of the court have been directly corrupted."
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)