There was a case sometime ago involving a grave digger in Oklahoma who wanted access to his children from his former common law union. His common law wife had decided on day one to use him like a parasite within 3 years and nine months. On cue, they broke up. He was a small insurance business owner when they met and did not really earn a lot but enough to take care of them. She left and started lying to the the insurance brokers union who decided not to re register his association. She said he hit but he never did. She filed for custody and access of the children but was a refugee. She had de facto custody on a daily basis but there was no order. In court, he was willing to consent to custody so long as there was weekly access granted to him as the father with child support based on his grave digger salary. She did not agree. She wanted to know how much money he had and accused him of hiding millions. His personal savings, however, would have to be irrelevant as the child support is calculated bases on evidence of income over the last three years. His tax returns were sufficient proof of his earnings. She argued for the evidence of actual bank statements. Yet, there is no need for the court to go beyond the evidence of the tax returns. An order for business records beyond the tax returns is just ultra vires considering that the famiky court has no basis or grounds to impeach the tax returns already processed by the government. It is just an anathema, embarrassing unruly contemptuous waste of the Court's time to go beyond the tax returns; sick white. As there was no order for custody the Judge ordered business records from both parties as she ran a nail salon. This kept the status quo between the parties equal. The parties eventually reconciled since she needed him for papers and she had his fast food restaurant burger disease anyway and what is the point if it's all the same; right? If you have any questions call for a consultation.

There was a case sometime ago involving a grave digger in Oklahoma who wanted access to his children from his former common law union. His common law wife had decided on day one to use him like a parasite within 3 years and nine months.  On cue, they broke up.  He was a small insurance business owner when they met and did not really earn a lot but enough to take care of them. She left and started lying to the the insurance brokers union who decided not to re register his association.  She said he hit but he never did.  She filed for custody and access of the children but was a refugee.  She had de facto custody on a daily basis but there was no order. In court, he was willing to consent to custody so long as there was weekly access granted to him as  the father with child support based on his grave digger salary.  She did not agree. She wanted to know how much money he had and accused him of hiding millions. His personal savings, however, would have to be irrelevant as the child support is calculated bases on evidence of income over the last three years.   His tax returns were sufficient proof of his earnings. She argued for the evidence of actual bank statements.  Yet, there is no need for the court to go beyond the evidence of the tax returns.  An order for business records beyond the tax returns is just ultra vires considering that the famiky court has no basis or grounds to impeach the tax returns already processed by the government. It is just an anathema, embarrassing unruly contemptuous waste of the Court's time to go beyond the tax returns; sick white. As there was no order for custody the Judge ordered business records from both parties as she ran a nail salon. This kept the status quo between the parties equal.   The parties eventually  reconciled since she needed him for papers and she had his fast food restaurant burger disease anyway and what is the point if it's all the same; right?

If you have any questions call for a consultation.