Skip to comments.
SoCal man won't get refund of support for child that isn't his
AP via CoCoTimes ^
| 6/22/7
Posted on 06/22/2007 10:29:37 AM PDT by SmithL
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-52 next last
1
posted on
06/22/2007 10:29:44 AM PDT
by
SmithL
To: SmithL
And that, my friend, is good ole American Justice. NOT! It stinks like all of the cr@p that runs through the courts at all levels.
2
posted on
06/22/2007 10:33:59 AM PDT
by
Frwy
(Proud member of the vast right wing conspiracy.)
To: SmithL
3
posted on
06/22/2007 10:34:59 AM PDT
by
Hegemony Cricket
(Don't mistake timid driving for defensive driving.)
To: SmithL
How about if they find the actual father, he reimburses the guy as well as pays child support?
4
posted on
06/22/2007 10:35:33 AM PDT
by
Right Wing Assault
("..this administration is planning a 'Right Wing Assault' on values and ideals.." - John Kerry)
To: SmithL
Why can’t he sue the “real” sperm donor....ummm...father for back support?
Paul.
5
posted on
06/22/2007 10:36:26 AM PDT
by
spacewarp
(Gun control is a tight cluster grouping in the chest and one in the forehead.)
To: SmithL
Why couldn’t he sue mom for common law fraud and use the support paid as the proper measure of damages (along with every other dime he ever shelled out)?
6
posted on
06/22/2007 10:36:40 AM PDT
by
joebuck
To: SmithL
7
posted on
06/22/2007 10:37:03 AM PDT
by
Wolfie
To: SmithL
In this case I would rule the Court and the Department of Child Support Services just volunteered to pay all damages. After all they don't want the child to suffer on the account of the mother's fraudulent claims.
8
posted on
06/22/2007 10:37:52 AM PDT
by
darkwing104
(Let's get dangerous)
To: joebuck
Better yet, this judge should have just rendered those decisions.
Comment #10 Removed by Moderator
To: SmithL
Not that it’s his fault, but I wonder why he waited so long to do a DNA test.
The whole child support system stinks.
To: SmithL
12
posted on
06/22/2007 10:39:06 AM PDT
by
HitmanLV
("Lord, give me chastity and temperance, but not now." - St. Augustine)
To: joebuck
I don’t think that would work out too well. She could easily say (perhaps truthfully) that she was believed James was the father.
To: SmithL
Sue the woman for theft by fraudulent means.
14
posted on
06/22/2007 10:41:16 AM PDT
by
OB1kNOb
(WHERE'S THE FENCE ? KILL BILL - II !! Vote Conservative. Vote Duncan Hunter - 2008)
To: SmithL
Put a lien on the beeyatch’s house.
15
posted on
06/22/2007 10:42:05 AM PDT
by
exit82
(Trent Lott needs fixing, not talk radio.)
To: SmithL
I think the best question is:
Why can’t states pass laws that say that parents are not responsible for child support for children that can be proven through DNA to be not theirs, regardless of time limits.
16
posted on
06/22/2007 10:46:09 AM PDT
by
jjw
(shameless plug for free coin classifieds: http://www.coinbug.com)
To: SmithL
17
posted on
06/22/2007 10:47:36 AM PDT
by
lowbridge
("The mainstream media IS the Democratic Party." - Rush Limbaugh)
To: Right Wing Assault
I do not see any mention of anyone going after the person whose lie started all this.
Very few women do not know who the father of their child is, and given he was away on war duty at times that the child may have been conceived, she could have said “I am not sure.” But she did not.
18
posted on
06/22/2007 10:52:33 AM PDT
by
bajabaja
To: joebuck
Why couldnt he sue mom for common law fraud and use the support paid as the proper measure of damages (along with every other dime he ever shelled out)?Why isn't she in jail for perjury and abuse of process.
To: CaliGirlGodHelpMe
"I dont think that would work out too well. She could easily say (perhaps truthfully) that she was believed James was the father."
The fraud would be her statement she was having sex with nobody else that she was completely faithful with him. After meeting with his attorney he would probably clearly remember her having made those statements. Since this was an untrue statement of an current or past fact which she knew or should have known he was relying on to his detriment....bingo, we have fraud. Now what's the best measure of damages?
20
posted on
06/22/2007 10:57:56 AM PDT
by
joebuck
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-52 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson