The end is near….
Soon this conning reprobate can go back to her mysterious, offshore, hoor-island, … you know, the one where desperate, petty and jealous sperm stalkers live out their disastrous lives.
We were kept in the dark for seven years about the void nature of the paternity judgment she fraudulently obtained against my husband, against due process protections, based on her outrageous legal fallacies, procedural posturing and felony deceits.
The babymama in our Kaftaesque nightmare was married to another man when her child was born. She and the presumed father deliberately waived their legal right to challenge the marital presumption of parentage that applied to preclude any untimely, government interventions.
Because my husband never had any relationship with the child, during all that time, under California law he did not and could not qualify for any “presumed father status” , or standing which would permit the natural babymama to prosecute or sue him, to in effect challenge the legal presumption of paternity that established only that her previous husband was the only legal father.
Her former husband acted in collusion with her to obstruct the establishment of any other potential father for eight years. He knew about the child during that time frame, but he chose anyway to emotionallly and financially, “aid and abet” the mother’s unilateral conduct or personal choices, to raise her child without any outsider interference from any third parties, such as the despicable and inappropriate, sperm donors wife. Because The presumed father financially supported the child during that time, he is judicially precluded from untimely claiming any right or any entitlement to be disestablished as the only liable, second parent.
The court never established that it had any fundamental or subject matter jurisdiction over my husband to act or to hear the mother’s fraudulent petitions, or to render unauthorized and precipitous adjudications, when there was no factual predicate established or legal basis presented under burdens of prooof for the court to proceed or to act.
The actions of the court are considered to be legal nullities, and worthlesss, making its unlawful judgment or orders, “wholly void” on its face, as a matter of law.
The court must dismiss and vacate the case, because by law, it has no legal discretion to treat void adjudications as if they are valid, when they are not. Which would erroneously give its rulings “undue effect”. ( See: Carlson v. Eassa (1997) 54 Cal. App. 4th 684,691 ; and County of San Diego v. Gorham (2010) 186 Cal. App. 4th 1215, 1225-1226. )
Unfortunately for the babymama, who claimed marital privileges and immunities to obstruct justice, “Res Judicata” principles do not apply to void orders. But principles of estoppel and waiver do.
“Nothing abrogates or otherwise effects waiver and estoppel principles.”
( Cal. Code of Civil Procedure , section 583.140 )
The court has a legal duty to set aside the void judgments and orders.
“Justice means time does not confirm void acts.”