The low road is wide and packed with vile, mentality deranged paranoiacs, like our spurned and disgruntled, fatal-attraction type, sperm-stalker.
This soulless hustler is once again, misrepresenting history and corruptly casting out baseless aspersions and mendacious dross to commit fraud upon the courts. She can not accept that she is still, socially insignificant, and apparently losing her shelf life. She believes if she garners enough misplaced sympathy, by employing twisted pity ploys, her irrational strategy will work out to her advantage in the end.
Her tired old antics of making unsubstantiated, red-herring accusations that somehow, –I am “harassing her”– , merely because my husband’s lawyer is submitting factual and legal positions to ask the court to quash her frivilous legal claims of relief, are laughable.
She and her “mooching tick on a soulless troll”, lawyer asked the court for financial reliefs, that the lower court has no authority, or legal power to grant, when the case is already at the appeal court. She preposterously invoked marriage-divorce specific codes, implying that they should apply to her, as a spurned, ex-sperm stalking interloper to extort $70,000 out of us for her yet, non-existent, legal fees, so she could fight our appeal.
The only obvious problem with this strategy is that her own declarations eviscerated her meritless claims of need, and demonstrated that she is not some aggrieved, pro-se litigant, or a party who was ever married to “my husband.”
There are no collaterally related issues at stake that are not otherwise affected by our appeal, that would allow the lower court to even intervene, to grant her bogus entitlement claims for relief. She also complained that my husband should be equitably sanctioned or financially punished, in the amount of $20,000 dollars, for daring to challenge her decits and extrinsic frauds upon the court, by his mounting an appeal to attack the court’s underlying void judgments and orders, proven to be void, as a matter of law, on its face.
The examination of the record, showed that the previous judgments and orders are “wholly void”, for violations of due process and for lack of any fundamental jurisdiction over the parties, which boid acts of the court resulted in a miscarriage of justice.
Apparantly, she does not have the mental capacity to legally analyze statutes, or understand that one can not be unfairly “subjected to” unauthorized, family law proceedings, or prosecuted through unlawful legal means, when a party does not qualify for standing. In effect, if the court violates due process protections, its actions are void acts, that constitute a collusive fraud upon the court.
In this case the court initially, (” ab initio”) had no jurisdictional powers to act, or to intervene, in a private family matter, because the court lacked any further jurisdiction. If a litigant lacks standing, a court has no subject matter jurisdiction over the parties “to proceed”, or to hear the case, “at all”.
( See Reno v. Flores (1993) U.S. Supreme Court case law. [ a court has no authority to intervene in private family matters, when no compelling state interests arise.] ; Librers vs. Black (2005) 129 Cal.App. 4th 114,124.)
These underlying legal facts, as amatter of law, renders all “ensuing judgments and legal proceedings void, as a matter of law.
( See Carlson v. Eassa (1997) 54 Cal. App. 4th 684,690-696.[ an order giving effect to underlying void orders, where there was no fundamental jurisdiction, is itself void, and the unauthorized granting of reliefs the court has “no right to grant “, to one of the parties, … is an appealable judgment.].)
Therefore, if you or your flying monkeys are reading this, the appeal claim is not “baseless”; — and your unethical lawyer is arguably trying to screw you over, for unjust enrichment purposes ! You can’t plead the merits of a case, in a collusive, or an unjusticiable controversy, when there is no underlying legal basis or standing status for the court to hear the defective cause or case, at all.
Do you really think that if you lose, you can pay us back the ungodly amounts of unjustified legal fees or sanctions that you are asking for, before the court has even ruled on the significant, appellate matters at issue ??? Standing or the subject matter jurisdictional issues are threshold questions of law. You either have standing or not. Standing is determined by statute, not by the collusive acts of the court.
At first it appeared that the lower court slapped down her absurd arguments once it realized there was no former marrriage. But her counter argument was that because the court previously granted her and the presumed father, (her real ex-husband) sole legal and physical custody over her marital child, that inapplicable point was a valid legal basis to invoke legal fee claims for the appeal process against a man who has no custody rights, or standing as a presumd parent. Unfortunately such claims for new rights can not be interpreted or acquired from the inapplicable codes she cites.
Cal. Family Code 7605 is not applicable either for legal fee claims.
So tell me, how is it you can get all this pro bono work done for you, if you have, no job, no savings, no assets or money ??
I never cease to be amazed at the levels of false premises you and your unethical mooching tick resort to to justify your unjustified entitlement to steal from others.