Ask Experts Questions for FREE Help !
Ask
    GV70's Avatar
    GV70 Posts: 2,918, Reputation: 283
    Family Law Expert
     
    #61

    Feb 9, 2014, 12:40 PM
    And finally... be ready to be asked, ' Why you have been missing for eight years?"
    choosinganangel's Avatar
    choosinganangel Posts: 54, Reputation: 1
    Junior Member
     
    #62

    Feb 9, 2014, 05:50 PM
    Wow GV70, you've got some issues as well it seems. First you said 7 years, now 8, and missing? Is not even close, I've always talked to my child so long as numb nuts let me, and I even gave him a cell phone so when his dad made it impossible he could call me and I'd get help his way... and when his father found it, he threw it away. So let's see, missing is no one knows where I am? Having no presence in my child's life? Wrong wrong wrong and wrong. And as per your lovely Statues, trying to ignore my entire VERY VERY TELLING statute about his rights and duties as a parent, is telling.
    (c) A court having jurisdiction may modify an order concerning the care, custody and visitation of the children if there is a showing by either parent of a material change in circumstances since the entry of the order in question and that the modification would be in the best interests of the children pursuant to
    W.S. 20-2-201(a).
    (a) A court in this state which enters a custody order under W.S. 20-2-201 has continuing subject matter jurisdiction to enforce or modify the decree concerning the care, custody and visitation of the children as the circumstances of the parents and needs of the child require, subject to the provisions of the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act.

    20-2-201. Disposition and maintenance of children in decree or order; access to records.

    (a) In granting a divorce, separation or annulment of a marriage or upon the establishment of paternity pursuant to W.S. 14-2-401 through 14-2-907, the court may make by decree or order any disposition of the children that appears most expedient and in the best interests of the children. In determining the best interests of the child, the court shall consider, but is not limited to, the following factors:

    So if I'm correct, then unless he's not established paternity, (because it reads, Upon the Establishment of Paternity)... then yeah he can modify it. Lol But being that he was the adjudicated father, and I'm not claiming anyone else can be, then he can't bring it to the court to modify it either way :D EVER! His time limits to rescind his denial of paternity is way over, (2 years). Why do you think he's secretly changed the child's name? Cause our decree speaks of what the child's name shall be caused to be... oh and yeah, baby, can you say F.B.I. hee hee
    choosinganangel's Avatar
    choosinganangel Posts: 54, Reputation: 1
    Junior Member
     
    #63

    Feb 9, 2014, 06:34 PM
    That each of the parties, and both of them, understand
    Their rights to petition the Court to enforce and/or modify the
    Terms of any Court Order or Decree pursuant to the provisions of
    Wyoming Statutes 20-2-201 through -204 and -311(d) (and any
    Amendments thereto), and that any such modification may not be
    Effective prior to the date of filing an appropriate motion or
    Petition for modification.

    (b) The father-child relationship is established between a man and a child by:

    (I) An unrebutted presumption of the man's paternity of the child under W.S. 14-2-504;
    14-2-504.Presumption of paternity in context of marriage.(never married or lived together dear)

    (iii) Identified as the father through genetic testing under W.S. 14-2-705;
    (vii) "Determination of parentage" means the establishment of the parent-child relationship by the signing of a valid acknowledgment of paternity under article 5 of this act or by adjudication by the court;

    (xxi) "This act" means W.S. 14-2-401 through 14-2-907.

    ScottGem's Avatar
    ScottGem Posts: 64,966, Reputation: 6056
    Computer Expert and Renaissance Man
     
    #64

    Feb 9, 2014, 08:23 PM
    You come here asking for help. Several people have tried to help by explaining to you that you are misreading the law. Instead, you argue with them. If you know so much why are you in this predicament in the first place?

    I wish you well, but I have a hard time understanding your attitude here.
    GV70's Avatar
    GV70 Posts: 2,918, Reputation: 283
    Family Law Expert
     
    #65

    Feb 9, 2014, 08:27 PM
    Quote Originally Posted by choosinganangel View Post
    . Lol But being that he was the adjudicated father, and I'm not claiming anyone else can be, then he can't bring it to the court to modify it either way :D EVER!
    As I said you read laws as Satan reads the Bible! It is only your desire but you are out of the truth!
    Even third parties may bring action for custody.
    He "missed" what?
    I lost interest but would you like to cite statute, article, etc where it is said that ADJUDICATED FATHERS do not have rights for custody?
    GV70's Avatar
    GV70 Posts: 2,918, Reputation: 283
    Family Law Expert
     
    #66

    Feb 9, 2014, 08:41 PM
    Quote Originally Posted by choosinganangel View Post
    (b) The father-child relationship is established between a man and a child by:

    (I) An unrebutted presumption of the man's paternity of the child under W.S. 14-2-504;
    14-2-504.Presumption of paternity in context of marriage.(never married or lived together dear)

    (iii) Identified as the father through genetic testing under W.S. 14-2-705;
    (vii) "Determination of parentage" means the establishment of the parent-child relationship by the signing of a valid acknowledgment of paternity under article 5 of this act or by adjudication by the court;

    (xxi) "This act" means W.S. 14-2-401 through 14-2-907.

    It is about Presumption of paternity in context of marriage... and your case is not this one.The applicable article is:
    14-2-501. Establishment of parent-child relationship.

    (a) The mother-child relationship is established between a woman and a child by:

    (I) The woman's having given birth to the child;

    (ii) An adjudication of the woman's maternity; or

    (iii) Adoption of the child by the woman.

    (b) The father-child relationship is established between a man and a child by:

    (I) An unrebutted presumption of the man's paternity of the child under W.S. 14-2-504;

    (ii) An effective acknowledgment of paternity by the man under article 6 of this act, unless the acknowledgment has been rescinded or successfully challenged;

    (iii) An adjudication of the man's paternity;


    (iv) Adoption of the child by the man; or

    (v) The man's having consented to assisted reproduction by his wife under article 8 of this act which resulted in the birth of the child.
    GV70's Avatar
    GV70 Posts: 2,918, Reputation: 283
    Family Law Expert
     
    #67

    Feb 9, 2014, 11:59 PM
    Quote Originally Posted by choosinganangel View Post
    Scott, the case is under civil domestic relations, not married, or consenting or having any past live in setting together... The statute is only interpreted just how it is written. "If you deny paternity and there is a birth certificate without the father's name filed with vital statistics (birth certificate with no father)"(valid denial), and then found to be father due to forced dna tests by State Agency Proceedings, (then the state puts your name as father) valid acknowledgment of paternity, = an adjudication of the non paternity of the presumed father and discharges the presumed father from all rights and duties of a parent.

    (b) Except as otherwise provided in W.S. 14-2-607 and 14-2-608, a valid denial of paternity by a presumed father filed with the state office of vital records in conjunction with a valid acknowledgment of paternity is equivalent to an adjudication of the non paternity of the presumed father and discharges the presumed father from all rights and duties of a parent.
    Again-what does marital presumption have commonly with paternity adjudication?
    As I said there are several ways a paternity to be established:
    1 Paternity presumption/ that's mean marital presumption/
    2 Paternity acknowledgment
    3 Court adjudication of paternity.

    You messes paternity presumption and adjudication.
    choosinganangel's Avatar
    choosinganangel Posts: 54, Reputation: 1
    Junior Member
     
    #68

    Feb 10, 2014, 01:13 AM
    (b) Except as otherwise provided in W.S. 14-2-607 and 14-2-608, a valid denial of paternity by a presumed father filed with the state office of vital records in conjunction with a valid acknowledgment of paternity is equivalent to an adjudication of the non paternity of the presumed father and discharges the presumed father from all rights and duties of a parent.

    Presumed father... (is the one I'm claiming to have caused the pregnancy)
    Valid Denial... (by a presumed father... ^filed with the state office of vital records) initial birth certificate filed, no father's name, once asked by DFS to sign that he was the father, he refused stating he wasn't, went and got an attorney) they filed the birth certificate as accused father denies paternity... Valid acknowledgment of paternity, is after proven to be the father through court ordered genetic tests, and ordered by DFS to add his name as father, which is equivalent to an adjudication of the non paternity of the presumed father and discharges the presumed father from all rights and duties of a parent.

    14-2-607. Proceeding for rescission.
    14-2-608. Challenge after expiration of period for rescission.

    He is discharged from all rights and duties of a parent.

    Yes, he's the paternal party of the child, and he should have not denied it and tried to claim "sterile" or tried to threaten me if I tried to name him as the father... when trust me, if I had anyone else to accuse I surely wouldn't have chosen him... he's got no parental rights or duties, but he does have an obligation by law, to provide for a child, even if he didn't want it, and didn't want it to be his. :D Get me? I'm just going by exactly what the statute states.
    ScottGem's Avatar
    ScottGem Posts: 64,966, Reputation: 6056
    Computer Expert and Renaissance Man
     
    #69

    Feb 10, 2014, 05:51 AM
    Quote Originally Posted by choosinganangel View Post
    Get me? I'm just going by exactly what the statute states.
    But that is one of the problems with the law. For every statute, there may be one that contradicts it. Please the law is not black and white. There are nuances, practicalities, etc. That's what keeps lawyers in Mercedes. And your problem is that you are hanging your hat on one statute and ignoring others. You are not arguing in front of a judge here. You don't have to convince us that this guy deserves to be in jail and your child belongs back with you. You did that a while ago.

    But you have a very limited understanding of the law and one that is very skewed. You are hanging your hat on statutes that don't apply or ones that you are misunderstanding. Again, if you are going to ignore the advice you are getting and argue with us, why bother continuing. Your fight is with the courts not us. We have told you how the courts will look at it.
    choosinganangel's Avatar
    choosinganangel Posts: 54, Reputation: 1
    Junior Member
     
    #70

    Feb 10, 2014, 01:38 PM
    Just signed the order to show cause!! I think I can now go and retrieve my child with police assistance!
    ScottGem's Avatar
    ScottGem Posts: 64,966, Reputation: 6056
    Computer Expert and Renaissance Man
     
    #71

    Feb 10, 2014, 01:48 PM
    Yay, Let us know how it works out.
    stinawords's Avatar
    stinawords Posts: 2,071, Reputation: 150
    Ultra Member
     
    #72

    Feb 10, 2014, 01:52 PM
    Glad to hear you are making progress!
    choosinganangel's Avatar
    choosinganangel Posts: 54, Reputation: 1
    Junior Member
     
    #73

    Feb 10, 2014, 03:41 PM
    I put the order in on Tuesday last week, he signed on Thursday, and had I not called today to see what was what, I would haven't known until it was mailed to me. I'm so excited I could cry... now to figure out if I can give my friend permission (that lives up where he is) to get the order (certified copy) from the court and get police to help her go get my child tonight, because by the time I get there, courts will be closed. Kidnapper should be served today or tonight, so I'm not going to take any chances on him fleeing... again. I've got every police department on alert who called me crazy cause he had an "order" that I called fake, as well as DCFS... lmao claiming I'm mentally unstable by thinking my child was kidnapped by his "paternal" father. Lmao So excited... and yet on edge. I've had investigators working on this for 1.5 months now and they didn't do a think, so the least they can do is assist me in bringing my child back to Utah... and yeah, someone, I think it was you Stina, said to call the FBI and I already did that a while back... and they haven't done a thing either. Totally makes me want to scream.
    cdad's Avatar
    cdad Posts: 12,700, Reputation: 1438
    Internet Research Expert
     
    #74

    Feb 10, 2014, 06:04 PM
    Maybe Im lost because of all the writing going on but when was your hearing on the order to show cause ?
    choosinganangel's Avatar
    choosinganangel Posts: 54, Reputation: 1
    Junior Member
     
    #75

    Feb 10, 2014, 06:07 PM
    So help me guys. Help now needed. I've got the order of the motion filed with the affidavit, Order is signed. Motion says,

    WHEREFORE, MOVANT respectfully requests the following:

    1. That an Order to Show Cause be issued directing Defendant/Respondent to appear before the court and Show Cause why he or she should not be found in contempt of court for violation of the Order as alleged.
    2. That the Court enforce the Order.
    3. That (explain anything else you would like the Court to do)deem the order's filed April 13, 2007 to be unenforceable in this Court or any other State. Court. Assist in the immediate return of the child to the mother. .
    4. For such other and further relief as the Court deems just and proper.


    Does that mean I can go now and get my kid? Or do I need to make sure he's been served first and the service has been filed with the court?
    cdad's Avatar
    cdad Posts: 12,700, Reputation: 1438
    Internet Research Expert
     
    #76

    Feb 10, 2014, 06:16 PM
    Quote Originally Posted by choosinganangel View Post
    So help me guys. Help now needed. I've got the order of the motion filed with the affidavit, Order is signed. Motion says,

    WHEREFORE, MOVANT respectfully requests the following:

    1. That an Order to Show Cause be issued directing Defendant/Respondent to appear before the court and Show Cause why he or she should not be found in contempt of court for violation of the Order as alleged.
    2. That the Court enforce the Order.
    3. That (explain anything else you would like the Court to do)deem the order's filed April 13, 2007 to be unenforceable in this Court or any other State. Court. Assist in the immediate return of the child to the mother. .
    4. For such other and further relief as the Court deems just and proper.


    Does that mean I can go now and get my kid? Or do I need to make sure he's been served first and the service has been filed with the court?


    It means that there is going to be a hearing on the matter. And at that hearing decisions will be made. He will have to be served notice of the action.


    If you didnt write this then who did regaurding 1-4 ?
    ScottGem's Avatar
    ScottGem Posts: 64,966, Reputation: 6056
    Computer Expert and Renaissance Man
     
    #77

    Feb 10, 2014, 06:17 PM
    The key here is 3. Does the order with a judge's signature say that the child should be immediately returned? I would check with the judge's office first thing in the AM to check what that means.
    stinawords's Avatar
    stinawords Posts: 2,071, Reputation: 150
    Ultra Member
     
    #78

    Feb 10, 2014, 06:39 PM
    Before you go pick up the child clarify it with the court. It looks to me like the judge is just reiterating to you and to the father what the hearing is going to be about. It doesn't look like the judge signed anything saying go get the child... just that he knows what you are requesting and it will be addressed at the hearing. Like I said double check with the court tomorrow. Is that what you got in the mail today? If there is to be a hearing you will need to know when so you can show up.
    ScottGem's Avatar
    ScottGem Posts: 64,966, Reputation: 6056
    Computer Expert and Renaissance Man
     
    #79

    Feb 10, 2014, 06:49 PM
    I agree with cdad and stina. But the possibility exists that the judge did order the immediate return of the child pending the hearing. But you have to be absolutely sure of that.
    choosinganangel's Avatar
    choosinganangel Posts: 54, Reputation: 1
    Junior Member
     
    #80

    Feb 10, 2014, 07:06 PM
    The Order is Based on the Motion, and the motion says to Enforce the Order, appear and show why he shouldn't be in contempt, make all his fake orders unenforceable, and there is a page at the end, that is an Order to Dismiss, or Vacate the Order, but that's only if I decide he's taken the steps to comply with the order(decree) that the judge says he needs to show and appear... and Mind you... you have to attach the order you want enforced, and if the judge signs the order... then it's to be enforced. And he has to appear, and if the judge didn't see the Decree as Enforceable, he never would have signed the order on the motion. So the whole deal is to make him come into compliance, or dare come to court with his fake documents and tell the judge that they are real, when they aren't. The judge had to look over the file of the case, to ensure the order seeking to be enforced is the true order before signing a contempt order, ensuring that the order attached to the motion is the one that is to be enforced. If he thought I was just crazy, he would have not signed the Contempt order to show cause... he would have dismissed it. Let me paste the portion of the dismissal page that shows this.

    And the Court, having reviewed the file and being otherwise fully advised; FINDS that the action for an Order to Show Cause should be dismissed.
    THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that the Order to Show Cause action be dismissed without prejudice and that the hearing, if any, be vacated. (That's if we both sign that he's in compliance... ) if he doesn't comply to the order to show cause, he still has to appear. :D

Not your question? Ask your question View similar questions

 

Question Tools Search this Question
Search this Question:

Advanced Search


Check out some similar questions!

Pay back child support if in an agreement [ 6 Answers ]

My husbands has been paying child support to his ex, but went to school, moved 6 states away, and has a better job now than he had before. He talked to her about court and she said she didn't want to do it again, and leave child support the same. He isn't behind on child support, and does send...

Breach of Rental Agreement [ 1 Answers ]

I am in Texas and I own a home in West Texas that I along with the tenant filled out a Rent/Lease Option to Purchase agreement. Within the agreement there are defaults one of which stated that if any changes are to be made they are to be in writing and notifying both parties landlord and tenant. ...

Employment agreement breach [ 3 Answers ]

My husband used to be a consultant through a consulting company and recently joined his client as an employee. This has been done by many other consultants from this company, without any consequences. We got singled out and received a notice from their lawyer last Friday that there's a hearing...

Breach of lease agreement? [ 3 Answers ]

I rent a 2 bedroom apartment with my girlfriend. I own 2 cars and she owns one. When we initially signed up I made sure to ask about parking for 3 cars and they assured me that since we were renting a 2 bedroom apartment it was fine for us to have 3 cars and they issued me 3 parking passes. ...


View more questions Search