Messages

if the state Title IV-d agency is enforceing the support, "you "need to notify them that said child is reached the age majority.
also, if there is no distinguishment of what will happen if said child does no follow his/her career and decides to go back to school"in youre decree" then there has to be a new hearing if either party thinks support is pertinent. remembering that said child is no longer a child being that they reached the age of majority.

The more correct question would be, who are you, or who do you claim to be.

Vested enterest.? Hate to disapoint you but there is no vested enterest in any of this, it holds no personal rights, nor does it hold personal enforcable rights.
The correct statement was SELF Enterest.

I see neither of you chose to go back and read the other parties post, and its questons it raised. However you somehow felt compelled to intervene and proscribe youre own thoughts.

being that you are without 1st hand knowledge to my case you are without merit or fact to speak of it.
 I dont think I have ever seen anywhere but here, 2 people, "jade""Misty" so bent on disinforming the public, circumnavigating the facts, and outright distrorting the facts,as you TWO.

I have to prove nothing, especialy to TWO entities that have a self proscribed enterest in the outcome of other peoples affairs.

The people, "public" have there own right to read what is presented, and then to draw there own conclusion upon the facts, and choose how to proceed there from.

You speak of case's and alleged law, but yet forget to mention every time the states and the agencies get caught with there hands outside there statutorial authoritzed authority, the 1st thing they do is claim 11th immunity, to save themselves from prosecution.

Hmmm..golly geezzzzz

Well ime glad we settled that you have nothing to support youre claims, nor do you deny youre self enterst in everyones elses affiars.

show me where an administrator for an Agency has any statutorial authority, with a correpsonding CFR's, or administartive regulation to decide custody outside of a court without a hearing.

and you got lost in the discussion. He was talking about administrative determinations of custody, not Judicial Decisions by a court, big Difference, and there is a big differrence in prevailing law on the two.
But being you spend so much time trying to discredit me, you didn't bother to read thoroughly

And like usual you spouted youre mouth off without understanding what ime talking about.
You keep on stateing massive case law precedent, but have yet to present one.
Nor do you deny that agencies are fact finders, nor do you deny that they have no judical authority.
Ive said it before and ille say it again, I have no special enterest in anyones elses case, but YOU sure do.

Agencies are fact finders,
Imagine one person,"yes a agency can consist of one person" being youre judge and jury, Administrative determinations, Administrative reviews, take place without youre presence, without youre 5th amendment right, without youre right to accounter, and or to deposition.
A couple of things come to quick mind-Denial of Due Process
Usurpation of the Judicial Courts
And in such cases, usurpation of the Executive branch, since there operating on Administrative laws, which have no effect on the general public, or more correctly can not be used as public law.
Seperation of powers and etc...

sounds more like youre opinion.

still nothing to back youre opinion.
Interpretation--in mysty's quote of the courts interpreting
my alleged opinion, as you put it, was backed with support wheres youres.
All i have seen is youre opinions, with nothing to support.
But being youre self enterest and laziness to do youre homework, I see neither of you brought any facts or case to rebut what i posted, all I see is nothing but youre one sided opinions.
And this ending issue had nothing to do with my case it was a response to a question entered by another.