Wednesday, April 29, 2009
LILLY COLLETTE'S COMMENTS TO "JEFFERSON COULD JOIN HIGH COURT"
Lilly Collette posted the following comment to Jefferson could join high court:
How many times does the family court have to be “reminded” of the Rules of Family Court before someone–puts their foot down—and does something about these mongrels?
http://www.sccourts.org/opinions/unpublishedopinions/HTMLFiles/COA/2009-UP-008.htm Fuller v. Fuller, App. Ct. 2009-UP-008[3] Although we have affirmed the appealed order based on our own findings from our review of the evidence, we take this opportunity to remind the family court bench that, under the South Carolina Rules of Family Court, “[a]n order or judgment pursuant to an adjudication in a domestic relations case shall set forth the specific findings of fact and conclusions of law to support the court’s decision.” Rule 26(a), SCRFC.
While we would not go so far as to refer to a judge as "a mongrel," this Opinion does give us pause. It is our understanding that Family Court Orders in South Carolina are usually prepared by the attorney for the "prevailing party" with input from the attorney for the other party. If the two attorneys involved in this case could not manage to craft an Order that both complied with the procedural rules and accurately reflected the facts presented at trial, what hope do so-called "Deadbeat Dads," who are often unrepresented by Counsel, have that their Orders will both comply with the procedural rules and accurately reflect the facts presented at trial? Therefore, shouldn't indigent "Deadbeat Dads" be provided with assigned counsel?
Labels: "Deadbeat Dads", Sixth Amendment
Comments:
<< Home
I have been in front of this judge, on two occasions, once in Family Court and later in the Court of Common Pleas. I was not impressed with her loose style and although I prevailed in the first Family Court matter, in the second Common Pleas matter thought she used her position to intimidate me into dropping my action. I would not want to appear before her again and I do not understand how she is one of only three judges be considered for this position. On the other hand, Judge Hearn heard a matter in my Family Court case and actually read the brief my attorney provided. Imagine that a judge that reads the affidavits and briefs filed before the hearing and actually makes a ruling on the law. Findings of fact and Conclusions of Law that actually followed the law. Hearn would have my vote.
# posted by 
: 6:29 PM
: 6:29 PM
http://earlcapps.blogspot.com/2009/04/john-few-best-of-three-good-supreme.html may be of interest to you.
Post a Comment
<< Home
