[an error occurred while processing this directive]
California Default Judgements
posted by Matt on 10:06 PM February 15th, 2005
Inequality Adam G. Alsop writes "I happened to come across your article on Taron James' Paternity Fraud case and thought that this link should be widely spread, as is speaks *directly* to the heart of that (and many similar cases).

In this appeal, the Court is VERY clear about the "wording" of the Law vs the "intent" of the law:

"The County, a political embodiment of its citizens and inhabitants, must always act in the public interest and for the general good. It should not enforce child support judgments it knows to be unfounded. And in particular, it should not ask the courts to assist it in doing so. Despite the Legislature’s clear directive that child support agencies not pursue mistaken child support actions, the County persists in asking that we do so. We will not sully our hands by participating in an unjust, and factually unfounded, result. We say no to the County, and we reverse."

This is a MAJOR victory for all those falsely accused of paternity and hit with a default judgement. While I am not in a similar position, I felt it important to pass along this information to you and your readers. Hopefully it will help set a standard across other states as well."

Fred on Maureen (and the Sisterhood) | Swedish government bans science on gender differences  >

  
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Old News (Score:2)
by Dittohd on 11:36 AM February 16th, 2005 EST (#1)
This is not only old news, the child support agency already tried to get this decision "depublished" so that it could not be used in future cases.

Fortunately, their court action to get this done was turned down.

Any new news on this where men previously screwed are getting their default judgements reversed? Anyone seen any numbers?

Dittohd

Re:Old News (Score:0)
by Anonymous User on 02:08 PM February 16th, 2005 EST (#2)
Yes we know of a number of them now who have had their judgments overturned. Taron James is set for hearing on 4/25. The Washington Times, Daily Journal and Daily Breeze, among a few others, are monitoring the case and reporting on it accurately for the most part. But the L.A. Times, of course, couldn't care less.

One of the problems is still that alot of victims out there don't know about the Navarrow case, or even about AB 252, and they gave up years ago after fighting unsuccessfully to overturn their judgments. Only a few media outlets have publicized it (we thank those who have). So it's a matter of getting the issue out, like everything else in the fight for men's rights.

Although this is old news I thank the person who posted it for thinking of the victims in CA enough to post this.

Marc A.
And Then... (Score:2)
by Dittohd on 11:01 PM February 16th, 2005 EST (#3)
Do you know of any plans for these aggrieved men to sue to get their money back, either from the government, mother, or true biological father?

Dittohd

Re:And Then... (Score:0)
by Anonymous User on 01:08 AM February 17th, 2005 EST (#4)
We're doing that with one person, but it's still a long shot given the way the law is written. Can't really talk about it here. There are others who are trying too, but nothing concrete yet.


[an error occurred while processing this directive]