Messages

Ref:

It depends on the state you are in.

Let me answer your questions on how it applies to my state.  I am not a lawer though, this is my opinion of how it is to be interpreted.

<
In Michigan the statue in I believe MCL 603 (2) reads roughly and I am paraphrasing:  Retroactive Modification may be set back to the date in which payer or payee has been given notice of the pending modification.

In MI  I believe that means when there is modification pending, that the retro date may (court's descretion) be set back to whenever the first person (payee or payer) was given the notice (regardless of who sends it to them).

Although there is discretion here the law is quite clear on its face so I don't believe that it is a matter of Judicial construction.

DH in MI should get mod date set back to whenever the first person was given notice provided that there is grounds determined for such modification.

<
Where I live in Oakland County we are suppose to provide the past six pay stubs at hearing.  Unless I know her income, I couldn't calculate the CS.  At the hearing, I would copy down hers and calculate it based on the facts.  If it doesn't match the ref's calculation, I ask why or file an objection if I do not agree.  


<

Depends on the custody status of DH.  They are undertoning as well how the money will affect the child.

<
Was BM previously ordered to pay DH the money? If not, no contempt.

<
Sorry, fortuneately I wouldn't know.  I pray that it doesn't happen, though.

I am objecting to a friend of the court recommendation and don't know all the different types of abuses of discretion or thier proper names.

1) What are the types of abuses of discretion called?

2) What are some simple examples to explain them?

3 ) What are some characteristic that each may have in thier definition which make them easy to identify in real life applications?

Actually, these meetings are not taped.  They are in essence quasi-judicial.  There is nothing put on the record or anything accepted on the record as evidence and the Judge rarely denies the recommendations that result from them.

At these meetings statements are made,  proof is offered, and then the Referee makes an unofficial recommendation written on carbon copied paper that you hand to the Judicial Clerk.  Then and only will the Clerk put you on the chalkboard docket showing that you are ready for your motion to be heard by the Judge.

Once your motion is brought before the Court, the Friend of the Court personel are often asked to comment about the issues the parties now have and the Judge rules on the motion.  The FOC often give an opinion based on unsubstantiated accusations from the meeting and no one is allowed to be cross examanied on anything heard or seen in the meeting.

Again I wonder:

1)  Do I have a right to insist that these meetings be taped if I am not allowed to be present?

My difficulty has been that I have mostly gotten irrelevant, vague, sometimes professionally unethical, and selective info back from my last two attorneys when interviewing them about the actual conversations taken place.  I believe that I must be adequately informed as to the issues seeing as the law makes me ultimately responsible for the objectives and means to any action taken. By leaving me out of these meetings it inhibits my ability to be such.

To be more specific regarding these untapped recommendation meetings, in early 2004 in the Sixth Circuit Court of Michigan a case surfaced in which two actual parties were present with Attorneys and in later proceedings conclusively determined to have been lied to at the time by both their Attorneys and the Family Counselor in the case.  The proof came in form of a waterproof mark capable digital voice recorder that was brought into the courthouse by one of the parties.  As a result, the Chief Judge of the Court reestablished tighter enforcement of the search procedures for such items. The action taken against the Family Counselor and the Attorney i am not privy too.

These meetings continue and to count I have been lied too twice by my Family Counselor and once by one of my past Attorneys at these meetings.  I am losing faith.  My children deserve better, I deserve better.  

1)  Do you realize the value of your honest answers that you consistantly provide to your members?

I do.
 

Hi!  I am a parent of three children in Michigan and have joint legal/joint physical custody with no primary residence of them under the auspices of the sixth Circuit Court Family Division.  Whenever I show up for a motion hearing that has been precipe before my assigned Judge and check in with the Judge's Clerk at the scheduled hearing time, I am instructed to immediately see the Friend of the Court Referee and Family Counselor across the hall for a recommendation meeting first.  This is standard procedure even if I am there for de novo hearing on an objection of a previous recommended order from the same Referee.

If I have an appearance with counsel and the other party's Attorney is also present, both my ex and I are told to wait in the courtroom while our Attorney's meet with the Referee and Family Counselor for the meeting.  If either one of our Attorney's do not appear for the meeting, then, and only then, my ex and I are allowed to be present.  I feel this is wrong and hope to object to this practice.  I believe that I should have the right to be present at any hearing in which the Lawyers are present.  Based on these facts my questions are:

1) In your opinion on what grounds would I have a reasonable legal objection for this court's practice?

2) Where specifically should I look for precedence on your proposed objection to this practice?

3) Do I have legal right to insist that this meeting take place with me present, and if so, what is this right?

4) Where is this right cited in the law?

5) Do I have legal right to insist that this meeting take place on the record if I am not present, and if so, what is it?

6) Where is this right cited in the law?

Thanks Joni.

I was wondering when I would start to here the truth (if verifiable) about this Judge.  I would not be surprised to find out if there is truth behind these accusations.  People have to remember that these Judges are part of a cross section of society that show up in all professions.  

Currently, I am a member of DADS Of MICHIGAN.  I believe I have mentioned it before on the DOM website about Judge Beers (sp?) from the 6th Circuit 20 years ago having been caught being married to two woman in two states at the same time while he was a Judge!!!  Both women he fathered children with and was living separate lives with in two states.  Neither family new about the other.  

And seeing as I am about to display my email I would like to proclaim to Ms. Mathew's cronies, if they are reading this, that my name is DENNIS CRONK, one of her assigned cases.  On a personal note: YOU ARE NOT ABOVE THE LAW OR ABOVE PUBLIC SCRUTINY FOR YOUR POSITION.  We obviously do not question your integrity because we VOTED you in.  We expect and rely upon it.  Don't abuse it!!!

Joni, please send me info at [email protected] if you have it.  I don't see it in any email as yet.  

Keep in mind from what the Pastor has regrettably found out.

BIG BROTHER (or sister) IS ALWAYS WATCHING!!!

No, it is Judge Cheryl Mathews.  Former Assistant Prosecutor for Oakland County Child Abuse Unit.  She prides herself in being a new age trier of fact and to use her own words, also a "strict constructionist."

I have sat in her courtroom for three full days on my case and listening to other ones on Wednesday motion day.  I haven't done any actual count of men that she had personnally attacked with threats of Judicial  "street justice" when there is incomplete facts or purely unsubstantiated facts but it has been over 5.  I see Judge Judy anger coming out in her more often with each visit.  I wouldn't be surprised to see a complete "male until proven innocent" reputation soon.  You don't have a past job like she has had and not have personnal bias.  I just hope she moves on from my case in January like my last two Judges have.

I guess that you should be just about fed up with this constant courtroom flip flopping.  In the past, when I have read you and your husbands situation as it was happening I have wanted to comment on just how outrageously horrible it sounded, but I haven't.  I hope this gets better for her and you two.  Did her wannabe mother move to another pretentious neighborhood like the last?  Grosse Point wasn't it?
I hope this child at least has some good opportunities for a normal life.  

Hi! Joni.  It's nice to hear from you.  I have always been a true fan of your posts.  

In the past, I too have ignored the Ref's decision based upon this second recommendation which I regard as a quasi-appeal hearing.  Never in the three modifications that I have had in the last 18 months has there been any attempt to show definitive numbers to warrant a ref's decision.  He has purposely avoided giving any "numeric evidence" in support of evaluation of my income.  

The closest he came to presenting rationale to his decision making once involved making my attorney aware that he was going to evaluate my income based on a $70,000/yr salary with a $376.00 support payment to ex for 3 kids under the SER formulae. When my attorney came back to me in the courtroom to tell me this, I presented six officially prepared support scenarios using the current Margin Soft Child Support Calculator I had brought for the occasion (I know.  Being anal and prepared makes me an open target for all kinds of things).  My ex's income was fixed (stipulated upon as being accurate in all the scenarios) but mine was the income in question.  Guess What?  In the scenario with my income being $70,000/yr my support only came to $189.00/month, not the $376.00 he recommended on his carbon copied recommendation!  Busted right?  Not really.  Even though my attorney told me to "don't go there" and accept the recommendation I said no in no uncertain terms.  Hence, I gave my attorney the verbal "wat's the madder you" in the back of the head and sent him in again with an evil eye showing him the way.

My attorney went back into the meeting and asked what the discrepancy was.  Ref stated sorry, it was in a bad typo on my ex's income that he made in the program.  Yeah right!  Long story short, I was reevaluated $20 higher (now $396/month) without my yearly salary acknowledgement on the recommendation and sent before the Judge!  Ten minutes later I lost the motion on Judge's discretionary call without her ever looking at one single written word of evidence or paperwork.

In my opinion, with plenty of hindsight there is no justice.

Hi!  I am a CP with JP/JR shared custody with no primary residence in Michigan's 6th Circuit Family Court.  I noticed under "Ivan's" article "How To Hire an Effective Attorney" that he or she talkes about the importance of not agreeing to in chamber meetings with the Judge or, if you do, at least making sure that the client is present with council.  My question is:

1)  Does any know of any precedence, statutes or compiled law in Michigan that I can use to cite in an objection where just my attorney is told to attend the Friend of the Court "meeting" without me?

The situation is this.  Whenever you precipe to go before a 6th Circuit Family Court Judge in Michigan on a Wednesday morning motion call  the clerk that you check in with directs you to go with your attorney to a hallway outside of the jurors room next to the Judges courtroom.  From here you wait until your called to see the Referee and Family Counselor for a meeting that takes place so a recommendation can be given to the Judge right away.  Inevitably, 9 out of 10 times if your Lawyer is present with you, you are told to wait in the courtroom while your lawyer pleads your case.  From here unless your lawyer is  altruistic as Gandi you are officially out of the loop and at the mercy of "the system".
No other action than this pursuades those that they are trying to control to be compliant and repressed.

My experience has taught me that the single biggest advantage (to them. disadvantage to us) that Judges, Attorneys and FOC personnel exercise is that of keeping the litigants in the dark about the law, procedure, investigation findings and what is really being said behind  these closed doors.  Remember-ignorance is bliss.

Please send me any helpful information.  I have been railroaded so many times my screenname should be GrandCentral.