17-3-00240-23 | Elmer Allen Lewis vs Tera Ann Reed

Posted on June 14, 2023 by admin

Case Information

17-3-00240-23 | ELMER ALLEN LEWIS vs TERA ANN REED

Case Number
17-3-00240-23

Court
Mason

File Date
08/25/2017

Case Type
PPS Parenting Plan/Child Support

Case Status
Completed/Re-Completed

Party

Respondent (WIP)
REED, TERA ANN

DOB
XX/XX/1980

Active Attorneys

Lead Attorney
Stein, Renee’ Elizabeth

Retained

Petitioner (WIP)
LEWIS, ELMER ALLEN

DOB
XX/XX/1984

Minor (WIP)
Lewis, Rebel

DOB
XX/XX/2016

Events and Hearings

1 08/25/2017 Case Information Cover Sheet View Document Case Information Cover Sheet
2 08/25/2017 Motion for Waiver of Fees View Document Motion for Waiver of Fees
3 08/25/2017 Order to Proceed In Forma Pauperis View Document Order to Proceed In Forma Pauperis Judicial Officer
Sheldon, Toni A.
08/25/2017 Ex Parte Action With Order Judicial Officer
Sheldon, Toni A.
08/25/2017 Confidential Information Form
4 08/25/2017 Summons View Document Summons
5 08/25/2017 Petition for a Parenting Plan and or Child Support View Document Petition for a Parenting Plan and or Child Support
6 08/25/2017 Proposed Parenting Plan View Document Proposed Parenting Plan
7 08/25/2017 Declaration in Supp of Parenting Plan View Document Declaration in Supp of Parenting Plan
8 08/25/2017 Motion for Temporary Family Law Order and Restraining Order View Document Motion for Temporary Family Law Order and Restraining Order
9 08/25/2017 Affidavit of NonPayment of Public Assistance View Document Affidavit of NonPayment of Public Assistance
08/25/2017 Confidential Report in Sealed Envelope Comment
copy of Birth Certificate
10 08/25/2017 Notice of Hearing View Document Notice of HearingComment
Temporary Parenting Plan
11 08/31/2017 Affidavit Declaration Certificate Confirmation of Service View Document Affidavit Declaration Certificate Confirmation of Service
12 09/08/2017 Temporary Parenting Plan View Document Mason MinutesJudicial Officer
Sauerlender, Robert D Hearing Time
9:00 AM Result
Held Parties Present Petitioner (WIP): LEWIS, ELMER ALLEN Respondent (WIP): REED, TERA ANN
13 09/08/2017 Motion Hearing View Document Mason Minutes
14 09/08/2017 Order of Continuance View Document Order of Continuance Judicial Officer
Sauerlender, Robert D
15 09/08/2017 Notice of Appearance View Document Notice of Appearance
16 09/19/2017 Proposed Parenting Plan View Document Proposed Parenting Plan
17 09/19/2017 Declaration in Supp of Parenting Plan View Document Declaration in Supp of Parenting Plan
18 09/19/2017 Declaration Affidavit View Document Declaration Affidavit Comment
Terra Reed in Support of Proposed Parenting Plan
19 09/19/2017 Declaration Affidavit View Document Declaration Affidavit Comment
ELMER LEWIS
20 09/19/2017 Declaration Affidavit View Document Declaration Affidavit Comment
JAMIE STANTON
21 09/19/2017 Declaration Affidavit View Document Declaration Affidavit Comment
MYRIAH AVERY
22 09/19/2017 Declaration Affidavit View Document Declaration Affidavit Comment
ELSA HEWITT
23 09/19/2017 Copy View Document Copy Comment
TEXT MESSAGES
24 09/20/2017 Temporary Parenting Plan View Document Mason MinutesJudicial Officer
Sauerlender, Robert D Hearing Time
1:30 PM Result
Held
25 09/20/2017 Motion Hearing View Document Mason Minutes
26 09/20/2017 Affidavit Declaration Certificate Confirmation of Service View Document Affidavit Declaration Certificate Confirmation of Service
27 09/20/2017 Order of Continuance View Document Order of Continuance Judicial Officer
Sauerlender, Robert D
28 09/25/2017 Declaration Affidavit View Document Declaration AffidavitComment
Jamie Lynn Stanton
29 09/25/2017 Copy View Document Copy Comment
TEXT CONVERSATION
30 09/25/2017 Declaration Affidavit View Document Declaration AffidavitComment
ELMER LEWIS
31 09/26/2017 Affidavit Declaration Certificate Confirmation of Service View Document Affidavit Declaration Certificate Confirmation of Service
32 09/27/2017 Temporary Parenting Plan View Document Mason MinutesJudicial Officer
Sauerlender, Robert DHearing Time
1:30 PMResult
Held Parties Present Petitioner (WIP): LEWIS, ELMER ALLEN Respondent (WIP): REED, TERA ANN
33 09/27/2017 Order of Continuance View Document Order of Continuance Judicial Officer
Sauerlender, Robert D Comment
Temporary Parenting Plan
34 09/27/2017 Motion Hearing View Document Mason Minutes
35 10/03/2017 Declaration Affidavit View Document Declaration AffidavitComment
TERA REED
36 10/04/2017 Temporary Parenting Plan View Document
37 Mason Minutes View Document
38 Mason Minutes View Document
39 Mason Minutes View Document
40 Mason Minutes View Document Mason Minutes Judicial Officer
Sheldon, Toni A. Hearing Time
1:30 PM Result
Held Parties Present Petitioner (WIP): LEWIS, ELMER ALLEN Respondent (WIP): REED, TERA ANN
41 10/04/2017 Order for Hearing View Document Order for Hearing
42 10/04/2017 Motion Hearing View Document Mason Minutes Judicial Officer
Goodell, Daniel L
43 10/10/2017 Notice of Intent to Withdraw View Document Notice of Intent to Withdraw
44 10/11/2017 Presentation of Order View Document Mason Minutes Judicial Officer
Sheldon, Toni A. Hearing Time
9:00 AM Result
Held Comment
Hearing on 10-4-17 on Courts Ruling Parties Present Petitioner (WIP): LEWIS, ELMER ALLEN Respondent (WIP): REED, TERA ANN
45 10/11/2017 Order of Continuance View Document Order of Continuance Comment
TO 10-18-17 @ 8:30 AM
46 10/11/2017 Motion Hearing View Document
47 Mason Minutes View Document Motion Hearing Judicial Officer
Sheldon, Toni A.
10/18/2017 Presentation of Order Judicial Officer
Goodell, Daniel L Hearing Time
9:00 AM Comment
@ 8:30 AM
48 10/18/2017 Order Appointing Parenting Evaluator Investigator View Document Order Appointing Parenting Evaluator Investigator Judicial Officer
Goodell, Daniel L Comment
AND TEMPORARY ORDER
10/18/2017 Motion Hearing
49 11/01/2017 Motion and Affidavit Declaration View Document Motion and Affidavit Declaration
50 11/01/2017 Notice of Hearing View Document Notice of Hearing
51 11/02/2017 Affidavit Declaration Certificate Confirmation of Service View Document Affidavit Declaration Certificate Confirmation of Service
52 11/08/2017 Declaration Affidavit View Document Declaration Affidavit
53 11/09/2017 Motion Hearing View Document Mason Minutes Judicial Officer
Sauerlender, Robert D Hearing Time
2:00 PM Result
Held Parties Present Petitioner (WIP): LEWIS, ELMER ALLEN Respondent (WIP): REED, TERA ANN
54 11/09/2017 Motion Hearing View Document Mason Minutes Judicial Officer
Sauerlender, Robert D
55 11/09/2017 Order Modifying View Document Order ModifyingJudicial Officer
Sauerlender, Robert D Comment
Visitation Schedule
11/14/2017 Confidential Report in Sealed Envelope Comment
Custody Investigator Report
56 11/30/2017 Report View Document Report Comment
Visitation Notes November 20th, 22nd, 27th
57 12/01/2017 Temporary Order View Document Mason Minutes Judicial Officer
Sauerlender, Robert D Hearing Time
9:00 AM Result
Held Comment
Sonya Miles to call in at 10:30 a.m. 360-990-8677 Parties Present Petitioner (WIP): LEWIS, ELMER ALLEN
58 12/01/2017 Motion Hearing View Document Mason Minutes Judicial Officer
Sauerlender, Robert D
59 12/01/2017 Order Terminating View Document Order Terminating Comment
Supervised Visitation
60 12/04/2017 Order Authorizing View Document Order Authorizing Judicial Officer
Goodell, Daniel L
12/04/2017 Ex Parte Action With Order Judicial Officer
Goodell, Daniel L
61 12/04/2017 Affidavit Declaration Certificate Confirmation of Service View Document Affidavit Declaration Certificate Confirmation of Service
62 01/22/2018 Certificate View Document Certificate Comment
Consider the Children for Elmer Lewis
63 07/27/2018 Motion for Order to Show Cause View Document Motion for Order to Show Cause
64 07/27/2018 Temporary Restraining Order and Order to Show Cause View Document Temporary Restraining Order and Order to Show Cause
07/27/2018 Ex Parte Action With Order Judicial Officer
Finlay, Amber L
08/01/2018 Confidential Information Form Comment
LES
65 08/03/2018 Motion for Order to Show Cause View Document Motion for Order to Show Cause
66 08/03/2018 Declaration in Supp of Parenting Plan View Document Declaration in Supp of Parenting Plan
67 08/03/2018 Temporary Restraining Order and Order to Show Cause View Document Temporary Restraining Order and Order to Show Cause
68 08/08/2018 Affidavit Declaration Certificate Confirmation of Service View Document Affidavit Declaration Certificate Confirmation of Service
69 08/10/2018 Restraining Order View Document Mason MinutesJudicial Officer
Sauerlender, Robert D Hearing Time
9:00 AM Result
Stricken
70 08/10/2018 Hearing Stricken Not Confirmed and Not Heard View Document Mason Minutes
71 08/16/2018 Declaration Affidavit View Document Declaration Affidavit Comment
ELMER LEWIS
72 08/17/2018 Restraining Order View Document Mason MinutesJudicial Officer
Sauerlender, Robert D Hearing Time
9:00 AM Result
Held Parties PresentPetitioner (WIP): LEWIS, ELMER ALLEN Respondent (WIP): REED, TERA ANN
73 08/17/2018 Motion Hearing View Document Mason MinutesJudicial Officer
Sauerlender, Robert D
74 08/17/2018 Order of Continuance View Document Order of Continuance
75 08/27/2018 Proposed Parenting Plan View Document Proposed Parenting Plan
76 08/27/2018 Declaration Affidavit View Document Declaration Affidavit Comment
Tera Reed
08/27/2018 Medical Report Comment
Discharge Orders & Aftercare Plan
77 08/27/2018 Affidavit Declaration Certificate Confirmation of Service View Document Affidavit Declaration Certificate Confirmation of Service
78 08/29/2018 Declaration Affidavit View Document Declaration Affidavit Comment
of Elmer Lewis
79 08/31/2018 Restraining Order View Document Mason Minutes Judicial Officer
Sauerlender, Robert D Hearing Time
9:00 AM Result
Held Parties Present Petitioner (WIP): LEWIS, ELMER ALLEN Respondent (WIP): REED, TERA ANN
80 08/31/2018 Temporary Order View Document Temporary Order Judicial Officer
Sauerlender, Robert D
81 08/31/2018 Motion Hearing View Document Mason Minutes Judicial Officer
Sauerlender, Robert D
08/31/2018 Medical Report
82 09/04/2018 Declaration Affidavit View Document Declaration Affidavit Comment
ELMER LEWIS
83 09/04/2018 Declaration Affidavit View Document Declaration Affidavit Comment
ELMER LEWIS
84 09/06/2018 Affidavit Declaration Certificate Confirmation of Service View Document Affidavit Declaration Certificate Confirmation of Service
85 09/07/2018 Review Hearing View Document Mason Minutes Judicial Officer
Sauerlender, Robert D Hearing Time
9:00 AM Result
Held Comment
Special Set @ 10Parties Present Petitioner (WIP): LEWIS, ELMER ALLEN Respondent (WIP): REED, TERA ANN
86 09/07/2018 Order of Continuance View Document Order of Continuance Judicial Officer
Sauerlender, Robert D
87 09/07/2018 Affidavit Declaration Certificate Confirmation of Service View Document Affidavit Declaration Certificate Confirmation of Service
88 09/07/2018 Motion Hearing View Document Mason Minutes Judicial Officer
Sauerlender, Robert D
89 09/10/2018 Declaration Affidavit View Document Declaration Affidavit Comment
TERA REED
90 09/14/2018 Temporary Restraining Order Judicial Officer
Hayes, Lynn K Hearing Time
9:00 AM Comment
Special Set 10:30
91 09/14/2018 Order of Continuance View Document Order of Continuance Comment
AND MODIFICATION OF TEMPORARY FAMILY LAW ORDER
92 09/14/2018 Declaration Affidavit View Document Declaration Affidavit Comment
TERA REED
93 09/14/2018 Affidavit Declaration Certificate Confirmation of Service View Document Affidavit Declaration Certificate Confirmation of Service
94 09/14/2018 Motion Hearing View Document Motion Hearing
95 09/20/2018 Affidavit Declaration Certificate Confirmation of Service View Document Affidavit Declaration Certificate Confirmation of Service
96 09/21/2018 Temporary Restraining Order View Document Mason Minutes Judicial Officer
Hayes, Lynn K Hearing Time
9:00 AM Result
Held Parties Present Petitioner (WIP): LEWIS, ELMER ALLEN Respondent (WIP): REED, TERA ANN
97 09/21/2018 Motion Hearing View Document Mason Minutes Judicial Officer
Hayes, Lynn K
98 09/21/2018 Temporary Order View Document Temporary Order
99 10/01/2018 Motion and Affidavit Declaration View Document Motion and Affidavit Declaration Comment
FOR ORDER TO WAIVE MEDIATION, ADDRESS RESTRAINING ORDER AND SCHEDULE TRIAL DATE
100 10/01/2018 Notice of Hearing View Document Notice of Hearing Comment
TEMPORARY ORDER
101 10/04/2018 Declaration Affidavit View Document Declaration Affidavit Comment
ELMER LEWIS
102 10/05/2018 Temporary Order View Document Mason MinutesJudicial Officer
Sauerlender, Robert D Hearing Time
9:00 AMResult
Held Parties Present Petitioner (WIP): LEWIS, ELMER ALLEN Respondent (WIP): REED, TERA ANN
103 10/05/2018 Motion Hearing View Document Mason Minutes Judicial Officer
Sauerlender, Robert D
104 10/05/2018 Affidavit Declaration Certificate Confirmation of Service View Document Affidavit Declaration Certificate Confirmation of Service
105 10/05/2018 Order View Document Order Comment
Terminating Restraints
106 12/13/2018 Proposed Parenting Plan View Document Proposed Parenting Plan
107 05/17/2019 Motion for Order to Show Cause View Document Motion for Order to Show Cause
108 05/17/2019 Temporary Restraining Order and Order to Show Cause View Document Temporary Restraining Order and Order to Show Cause
05/17/2019 Ex Parte Action With Order Judicial Officer
Sauerlender, Robert D
109 05/24/2019 Response View Document Response
110 05/24/2019 Motion for Order to Show Cause View Document Motion for Order to Show Cause
111 05/24/2019 Declaration Affidavit View Document Declaration Affidavit Comment
TERA REED
05/24/2019 Medical Report
112 05/24/2019 Copy View Document Copy Comment
DOCUMENTS FROM CAUSE # 19-2-254-23
113 05/24/2019 Certificate View Document Certificate Comment
CONSIDER THE CHILDREN FOR TERA REED
114 05/24/2019 Notice of Hearing View Document Notice of Hearing
115 05/28/2019 Affidavit Declaration Certificate Confirmation of Service View Document Affidavit Declaration Certificate Confirmation of Service
116 05/30/2019 Declaration Affidavit View Document Declaration Affidavit Comment
JOE COLEMAN
117 05/30/2019 Proposed Parenting Plan View Document Proposed Parenting Plan
118 05/30/2019 Social Media Message View Document Social Media Message
119 05/30/2019 Copy View Document Copy Comment
VISIT SUMMARY FROM ER
120 05/30/2019 Affidavit Declaration Certificate Confirmation of Service View Document Affidavit Declaration Certificate Confirmation of Service
121 05/31/2019 Restraining Order View Document Mason MinutesJudicial Officer
Sauerlender, Robert D Hearing Time
9:00 AM Result
Held Parties Present Petitioner (WIP): LEWIS, ELMER ALLEN Respondent (WIP): REED, TERA ANN
05/31/2019 Temporary Parenting Plan Judicial Officer
Sauerlender, Robert D Hearing Time
9:00 AM
122 05/31/2019 Motion Hearing View Document Mason Minutes Judicial Officer
Sauerlender, Robert D
123 05/31/2019 Order View Document Order Comment
TEMPORARY & TRIAL SETTING
124 06/19/2019 Affidavit Declaration Certificate Confirmation of Service View Document Affidavit Declaration Certificate Confirmation of Service
125 06/19/2019 Motion and Affidavit Declaration View Document Motion and Affidavit Declaration
126 06/19/2019 Notice of Hearing View Document Notice of Hearing Comment
SCHEDULED FOR MAY 28TH 2019
127 06/19/2019 Motion for Order to Show Cause View Document Motion for Order to Show Cause
128 06/19/2019 Declaration Affidavit View Document Declaration Affidavit Comment
TERA REED
129 06/19/2019 Order to Show Cause View Document Order to Show Cause
130 06/21/2019 Motion and Affidavit Declaration View Document Motion and Affidavit Declaration Comment
AMEND VISITATION/CUSTODY
131 06/21/2019 Declaration Affidavit View Document Declaration Affidavit Comment
TERA REED
132 06/21/2019 Notice of Hearing View Document Notice of Hearing
133 06/24/2019 Affidavit Declaration Certificate Confirmation of Service View Document Affidavit Declaration Certificate Confirmation of Service
134 06/28/2019 Show Cause/Contempt View Document Mason Minutes Judicial Officer
Sauerlender, Robert D Hearing Time
9:00 AM Result
Held Parties Present Petitioner (WIP): LEWIS, ELMER ALLEN Respondent (WIP): REED, TERA ANN
06/28/2019 Motion Hearing Judicial Officer
Sauerlender, Robert D Hearing Time
9:00 AM
135 06/28/2019 Motion Hearing View Document Mason Minutes Judicial Officer
Sauerlender, Robert D
136 06/28/2019 Order to Show Cause View Document Order to Show Cause Judicial Officer
Sauerlender, Robert D
137 07/03/2019 Declaration Affidavit View Document Declaration Affidavit Comment
ANGELICA ZAMBRANO
138 07/10/2019 Declaration Affidavit View Document Declaration Affidavit Comment
ELMER LEWIS
139 07/10/2019 Affidavit Declaration Certificate Confirmation of Service View Document Affidavit Declaration Certificate Confirmation of Service
140 07/10/2019 Affidavit Declaration Certificate Confirmation of Service View Document Affidavit Declaration Certificate Confirmation of Service Comment
BY MARISSA CAVANAUGH
141 07/10/2019 Affidavit Declaration Certificate Confirmation of Service View Document Affidavit Declaration Certificate Confirmation of Service Comment
BY ANGELICA ZAMBRANO
142 07/12/2019 Show Cause View Document Mason Minutes Judicial Officer
Sauerlender, Robert D Hearing Time
9:00 AMResult
Held Parties Present Petitioner (WIP): LEWIS, ELMER ALLEN Respondent (WIP): REED, TERA ANN
143 07/12/2019 Motion Hearing View Document Mason Minutes Judicial Officer
Sauerlender, Robert D
144 07/12/2019 Temporary Family Law Order View Document Temporary Family Law Order Judicial Officer
Sauerlender, Robert D
145 07/12/2019 Temporary Family Law Order View Document Temporary Family Law Order Judicial Officer
Sauerlender, Robert D
07/12/2019 Ex Parte Action With Order Judicial Officer
Sauerlender, Robert D
146 07/15/2019 Declaration of Mailing View Document Declaration of Mailing
147 07/17/2019 Motion and Affidavit Declaration View Document Motion and Affidavit Declaration Comment
FOR ISSUANCE OF SUBPOENA KATHY AUSETH
148 07/17/2019 Order Authorizing View Document Order Authorizing Judicial Officer
Goodell, Daniel L Comment
ISSUANCE OF SUBPOENA
07/17/2019 Ex Parte Action With Order Judicial Officer
Goodell, Daniel L
149 07/17/2019 Motion and Affidavit Declaration View Document Motion and Affidavit 150 150 DeclarationView Document Subpoena Comment
FOR ISSUANCE OF SUBPOENA BRITTANY PARTON
151 07/17/2019 Order Authorizing View Document Order AuthorizingJudicial Officer
Goodell, Daniel LComment
FOR ISSUANCE OF SUBPOENA
152 07/17/2019 Motion and Affidavit Declaration View Document Motion and Affidavit Declaration Comment
FOR ISSUANCE OF SUBPOENA GAIL REED
07/17/2019 Ex Parte Action With Order Judicial Officer
Goodell, Daniel L
153 07/17/2019 Order Authorizing View Document Order AuthorizingJudicial Officer
Goodell, Daniel L Comment
FOR ISSUANCE OF SUBPOENA
154 07/17/2019 Ex Parte Action With Order Judicial Officer
Goodell, Daniel L
155 07/18/2019 Subpoena View Document Subpoena Comment
KATHY AUSETH
156 07/18/2019 Subpoena View Document Subpoena Comment
BRITTANY PARTON
157 07/18/2019 Subpoena View Document Subpoena Comment
GAIL REED
158 07/26/2019 Return on Subpoena View Document Return on Subpoena Comment
BRITTANY PARTON
159 07/26/2019 Return on Subpoena View Document Return on Subpoena Comment
GAIL REED
160 07/26/2019 Return on Subpoena View Document Return on Subpoena Comment
KATHY AUSETH
161 08/01/2019 Trial Brief View Document Trial Brief
162 08/02/2019 Affidavit Declaration Certificate Confirmation of Service View Document Affidavit Declaration Certificate Confirmation of Service
163 08/02/2019 Affidavit Declaration Certificate Confirmation of Service View Document Affidavit Declaration Certificate Confirmation of Service
164 08/06/2019 Correspondence View Document Correspondence
08/13/2019 Non-Jury Trial Judicial Officer
Cobb, Monty D Hearing Time
9:00 AM
165 08/13/2019 Exhibit List View Document Exhibit List
166 08/13/2019 Stipulation and Order for Return of Exhibits and or Unopen View Document Stipulation and Order for Return of Exhibits and or Unopen Judicial Officer
Cobb, Monty D
167 08/13/2019 Witness List View Document Witness List
168 08/14/2019 Parenting Plan Final Order View Document Parenting Plan Final Order Judicial Officer
Cobb, Monty D
169 08/14/2019 Child Support Worksheet View Document Child Support WorksheetJudicial Officer
Cobb, Monty D
170 08/14/2019 Order for Support View Document Order for Support Judicial Officer
Cobb, Monty D
171 08/14/2019 Judgment Final Ord and Findings for Par Plan or Support View Document Judgment Final Ord and Findings for Par Plan or Support Judicial Officer
Cobb, Monty D
172 08/14/2019 Trial Minutes View Document Trial Minutes Comment
2 day trial 8/13/19 and 8/14/19
173 09/13/2019 Notice of Appeal to Court of Appeals View Document Notice of Appeal to Court of Appeals
174 09/13/2019 Affidavit Declaration Certificate Confirmation of Service View Document Affidavit Declaration Certificate Confirmation of Service
175 10/16/2019 Transmittal Letter Copy Filed View Document Transmittal Letter Copy Filed Comment
COA
176 02/03/2020 Mandate View Document Mandate
177 06/12/2020 Motion Hearing View Document Mason Minutes Judicial Officer
Sauerlender, Robert D Hearing Time
9:00 AM Result
Held Parties Present Petitioner (WIP): LEWIS, ELMER ALLEN Respondent (WIP): REED, TERA ANN
178 06/12/2020 Case Information Cover Sheet View Document Case Information Cover Sheet
179 06/12/2020 Summons View Document Summons
180 06/12/2020 Motion for Waiver of Fees View Document Motion for Waiver of Fees
181 06/12/2020 Order to Proceed In Forma Pauperis View Document Order to Proceed In Forma Pauperis Judicial Officer
Sauerlender, Robert D
06/12/2020 Ex Parte Action With Order Judicial Officer
Sauerlender, Robert D
06/12/2020 Confidential Information Form
182 06/12/2020 Motion for Order to Show Cause View Document Motion for Order to Show Cause
183 06/12/2020 Motion for Adequate Cause Decision View Document Motion for Adequate Cause Decision
184 06/12/2020 Petition Motion to Modify View Document Petition Motion to Modify
185 06/12/2020 Proposed Parenting Plan View Document Proposed Parenting Plan
186 06/12/2020 Declaration in Supp of Parenting Plan View Document Declaration in Supp of Parenting Plan
187 06/12/2020 Email View Document Email
188 06/12/2020 Email View Document Email
189 06/12/2020 Declaration Affidavit View Document Declaration Affidavit
190 06/12/2020 Declaration Affidavit View Document Declaration Affidavit
06/12/2020 Sealed Confidential Reports Cover Sheet Comment
HEALTH
191 06/12/2020 Temporary Family Law Order View Document Temporary Family Law OrderJudicial Officer
Sauerlender, Robert D
192 06/12/2020 Motion Hearing View Document Mason Minutes Judicial Officer
Sauerlender, Robert D
193 06/15/2020 Notice of Hearing View Document Notice of Hearing
194 06/16/2020 Social Media Message View Document Social Media Message Comment
TEXT MESSAGES EXB A
195 06/16/2020 Social Media Message View Document Social Media Message Comment
TEXT MESSAGES EXB B
196 06/16/2020 Social Media Message View Document Social Media Message Comment
TEXT MESSAGES EXB C
197 06/16/2020 Social Media Message View Document Social Media Message Comment
TEXT MESSAGES EXB D
198 06/16/2020 Social Media Message View Document Social Media Message Comment
TEXT MESSAGES EXB E
199 06/16/2020 Social Media Message View Document Social Media Message Comment
TEXT MESSAGES EXB F
200 06/16/2020 Social Media Message View Document Social Media Message Comment
TEXT MESSAGES EXB G
201 06/16/2020 Social Media Message View Document Social Media Message Comment
TEXT MESSAGES EXB H
202 06/16/2020 Social Media Message View Document Social Media Message Comment
TEXT MESSAGES EXB I
203 06/16/2020 Social Media Message View Document Social Media Message Comment
TEXT MESSAGES EXB J
204 06/16/2020 Social Media Message View Document Social Media Message Comment
TEXT MESSAGES EXB K
205 06/16/2020 Social Media Message View Document Social Media Message Comment
TEXT MESSAGES EXB L
206 06/18/2020 Affidavit Declaration Certificate Confirmation of Service View Document Affidavit Declaration Certificate Confirmation of Service
207 06/22/2020 Show Cause View Document Mason Minutes Judicial Officer
Sauerlender, Robert D Hearing Time
9:00 AM Result
Held Comment
1000A Parties Present Petitioner (WIP): LEWIS, ELMER ALLEN Respondent (WIP): REED, TERA ANN
208 06/22/2020 Motion Hearing View Document Mason Minutes Judicial Officer
Sauerlender, Robert D
209 06/22/2020 Order of Continuance View Document Order of Continuance
210 07/06/2020 Response View Document Response
211 07/06/2020 Declaration Affidavit View Document Declaration Affidavit Comment
COPY OF CURRENT PP AND VARIOUS PAGES WITH MODIFICATIONS
07/06/2020 Sealed Confidential Reports Cover Sheet Comment
HEALTH
07/06/2020 Sealed Confidential Reports Cover Sheet
07/06/2020 Sealed Confidential Reports Cover Sheet
212 07/06/2020 Declaration Affidavit View Document Declaration Affidavit
213 07/06/2020 Declaration Affidavit View Document Declaration Affidavit Comment
JORGE ZAMBRANO-MORALES
214 07/06/2020 Copy View Document Copy Comment
BOWLING INFO
215 07/06/2020 Copy View Document Copy Comment
MEMBERSHIP CARD
216 07/06/2020 Declaration Affidavit View Document Declaration Affidavit Comment
IN RESPONSE TO RESTRAINING ORDER
217 07/06/2020 Declaration Affidavit View Document Declaration Affidavit Comment
TERRY BASH
218 07/06/2020 Declaration Affidavit View Document Declaration Affidavit Comment
DANETTE MAGERSTAEDT
219 07/08/2020 Social Media Message View Document Social Media Message Comment
TEXTS
220 07/08/2020 Declaration Affidavit View Document Declaration Affidavit Comment
LINDA RUTLEDGE
221 07/09/2020 Affidavit Declaration Certificate Confirmation of Service View Document Affidavit Declaration Certificate Confirmation of Service
222 07/13/2020 Show Cause View Document Mason Minutes Judicial Officer
Sauerlender, Robert D Hearing Time
9:00 AM Result
Held Comment
11:00a Parties Present Petitioner (WIP): LEWIS, ELMER ALLEN Respondent (WIP): REED, TERA ANN
223 07/13/2020 Motion Hearing View Document Mason Minutes Judicial Officer
Sauerlender, Robert D
224 07/13/2020 Order Re Adequate Cause Denied View Document Order Re Adequate Cause Denied Judicial Officer
Sauerlender, Robert D Comment
AND DENYING PETITION
225 07/13/2020 Affidavit Declaration Certificate Confirmation of Service View Document Affidavit Declaration Certificate Confirmation of Service
07/22/2020 Case Resolution Statistical Completion
226 02/26/2021 Correspondence View Document Correspondence Comment
RE PT EXHIBITS
227 02/26/2021 Correspondence View Document Correspondence Comment
RE RSP EXHIBITS
228 04/09/2021 Affidavit View Document Affidavit Comment
OF DESTRUCTION
229 04/09/2021 Log Sheet View Document Log Sheet
230 10/18/2021 Motion for Order to Show Cause View Document Motion for Order to Show Cause
231 10/18/2021 Declaration Affidavit View Document Declaration Affidavit
232 10/18/2021 Copy View Document Copy Comment
SPD Call Log
233 10/18/2021 Order to Show Cause View Document Order to Show Cause Judicial Officer
Cobb, Monty D
234 10/18/2021 Motion Hearing View Document Motion Hearing Judicial Officer
Cobb, Monty D Comment
Ex Parte
235 10/18/2021 Affidavit Declaration Certificate Confirmation of Service View Document Affidavit Declaration Certificate Confirmation of Service
236 10/25/2021 Show Cause/Contempt Original Type
Show Cause/Contempt View Document Mason Minutes Judicial Officer
Ferguson-Brown, Cadine Hearing Time
9:00 AM Result
Continued Parties Present Petitioner (WIP): LEWIS, ELMER ALLEN
237 10/25/2021 Contempt Hearing View Document Mason Minutes Judicial Officer
Ferguson-Brown, Cadine
238 10/25/2021 Order on Contempt View Document Order on Contempt Judicial Officer
Ferguson-Brown, Cadine
239 04/26/2022 Motion for Order to Show Cause View Document Motion for Order to Show Cause
240 04/26/2022 Declaration Affidavit View Document Declaration Affidavit
241 04/26/2022 Copy View Document Copy Comment
Text Message 3.11.2022
242 04/26/2022 Copy View Document Copy Comment
Text / Call Records 4.02.2022
243 04/26/2022 Copy View Document Copy Comment
Text Messages
244 04/26/2022 Copy View Document Copy Comment
Text Messages
245 04/26/2022 Order to Show Cause View Document Order to Show Cause Judicial Officer
Cobb, Monty D
04/26/2022 Ex Parte Action With Order Judicial Officer
Cobb, Monty D
246 05/02/2022 Affidavit Declaration Certificate Confirmation of Service View Document Affidavit Declaration Certificate Confirmation of Service
247 05/09/2022 Show Cause/Contempt Original Type
Show Cause/Contempt View Document Mason Minutes Judicial Officer
Ferguson-Brown, Cadine Hearing Time
9:00 AM Result
Held Parties Present Petitioner (WIP): LEWIS, ELMER ALLEN Respondent (WIP): REED, TERA ANN
248 05/09/2022 Motion Hearing View Document Mason Minutes Judicial Officer
Ferguson-Brown, Cadine
249 05/09/2022 Order of Continuance View Document Order of Continuance Judicial Officer
Ferguson-Brown, Cadine
250 05/13/2022 Declaration Affidavit View Document Declaration Affidavit
251 05/13/2022 Copy View Document Copy Comment
Text Messages Set # 1
252 05/13/2022 Copy View Document Copy Comment
Text Messages Set # 2
253 05/13/2022 Copy View Document Copy Comment
Text Messages Set # 3
254 05/13/2022 Report View Document Report Comment
Incident
255 05/16/2022 Show Cause/Contempt Original Type
Show Cause/Contempt View Document Mason Minutes Judicial Officer
Ferguson-Brown, Cadine Hearing Time
9:00 AM Result
Held Comment
Elmer Lewis called to confirm at 8:31 AM on 5/11/2022Parties Present Petitioner (WIP): LEWIS, ELMER ALLEN Respondent (WIP): REED, TERA ANN
256 05/16/2022 Contempt Hearing View Document Mason Minutes Judicial Officer
Ferguson-Brown, Cadine
05/16/2022 Order on Contempt View Document Order on Contempt Judicial Officer
Ferguson-Brown, Cadine
05/16/2022 Affidavit Declaration Certificate Confirmation of Service View Document Affidavit Declaration Certificate Confirmation of ServiceComment
Photos
05/16/2022 Affidavit Declaration Certificate Confirmation of Service View Document Affidavit Declaration Certificate Confirmation of Service
08/16/2022 Motion for Temporary Order View Document Motion for Temporary Order
08/16/2022 Motion for Order to Show Cause
08/17/2022 Declaration Affidavit View Document Declaration AffidavitView Document Declaration Affidavit
08/17/2022 Case Information Cover Sheet View Document Case Information Cover Sheet
08/17/2022 Confidential Information Form
08/17/2022 Summons View Document Summons
08/17/2022 Petition Motion to Modify View Document Petition Motion to Modify
08/17/2022 Declaration in Supp of Parenting Plan View Document Declaration in Supp of Parenting Plan
08/17/2022 Proposed Parenting Plan View Document Proposed Parenting Plan
08/17/2022 Motion for Adequate Cause Decision View Document Motion for Adequate Cause Decision
08/17/2022 Notice of Hearing View Document Notice of Hearing
08/17/2022 Law Enforcement and Confidential Information Form
08/17/2022 Motion for Order to Show Cause View Document Motion for Order to Show Cause
08/17/2022 Declaration Affidavit View Document Declaration Affidavit
08/17/2022 Temporary Restraining Order and Order to Show Cause View Document Temporary Restraining Order and Order to Show CauseJudicial Officer
Ferguson-Brown, Cadine
08/17/2022 Order to Show Cause View Document Order to Show CauseJudicial Officer
Ferguson-Brown, CadineComment
NOTED ON DOC @ 231
08/17/2022 Motion Hearing
08/22/2022 Motion and Affidavit Declaration View Document Motion and Affidavit DeclarationComment
for Order Amending Immediate Restraining Order
08/22/2022 Declaration Affidavit View Document Declaration Affidavit
08/22/2022 Copy View Document CopyComment
of Request for Records
08/22/2022 Copy View Document CopyComment
Text Messages from Tera Reed
08/22/2022 Summons View Document Summons
08/22/2022 Proposed Order Findings View Document Proposed Order Findings
08/22/2022 Affidavit Declaration Certificate Confirmation of Service View Document Affidavit Declaration Certificate Confirmation of Service
08/22/2022 Order Denying Motion Petition View Document Order Denying Motion PetitionJudicial Officer
Ferguson-Brown, Cadine
08/22/2022 Motion Hearing View Document Motion HearingJudicial Officer
Ferguson-Brown, CadineComment
Ex Parte
08/26/2022 Report View Document ReportComment
Mason County Sheriff
08/29/2022 Show Cause Judicial Officer
Butler, Tirsa CHearing Time
9:00 AMCancel Reason
Duplicate Hearing
08/29/2022 Adequate Cause Judicial Officer
Butler, Tirsa CHearing Time
9:00 AMCancel Reason
Duplicate Hearing
08/29/2022 Restraining Order Original Type
Restraining OrderView Document Mason MinutesJudicial Officer
Butler, Tirsa CHearing Time
9:00 AMResult
HeldComment
ADEQUATE CAUSE, TEMP RESTRAINING ORDER & SHOW CAUSE ORDER ** CONFIRMED via phone 8/23/2022 by Elmer Lewis. -BHParties PresentPetitioner (WIP): LEWIS, ELMER ALLENRespondent (WIP): REED, TERA ANN
08/29/2022 Extension of Immediate Restraining Order and Hearing Notice View Document Extension of Immediate Restraining Order and Hearing NoticeJudicial Officer
Butler, Tirsa C
08/29/2022 Order on Contempt View Document Order on ContemptJudicial Officer
Butler, Tirsa C
08/29/2022 Motion Hearing View Document Mason MinutesJudicial Officer
Butler, Tirsa C
09/12/2022 Confidential Information Form
09/12/2022 Appearance Pro Se View Document Appearance Pro SeComment
Tera Reed
09/12/2022 Response View Document Response
09/12/2022 Copy View Document CopyComment
Exhibit 1B Educational Printouts
09/12/2022 Proposed Parenting Plan View Document Proposed Parenting Plan
09/12/2022 Declaration Affidavit View Document Declaration Affidavit
09/13/2022 Copy View Document CopyComment
Texts to Gail Reed
09/13/2022 Copy View Document CopyComment
Screenshots from Video
09/13/2022 Affidavit Declaration Certificate Confirmation of Service View Document Affidavit Declaration Certificate Confirmation of Service
09/14/2022 Appearance Pro Se View Document Appearance Pro SeComment
Tera Reed
09/14/2022 Motion for Order to Show Cause View Document Motion for Order to Show Cause
09/14/2022 Declaration Affidavit View Document Declaration Affidavit
09/14/2022 Order to Show Cause View Document Order to Show CauseJudicial Officer
Ferguson-Brown, Cadine
09/14/2022 Motion Hearing View Document Motion HearingJudicial Officer
Ferguson-Brown, CadineComment
Ex Parte
09/19/2022 Restraining Order Original Type
Restraining OrderView Document Mason MinutesJudicial Officer
Butler, Tirsa CHearing Time
9:00 AMResult
HeldComment
Elmer Lewis confirmed in person at the counter on 9/12/2022 at 9:09 AMParties PresentPetitioner (WIP): LEWIS, ELMER ALLENRespondent (WIP): REED, TERA ANN
09/19/2022 Motion Hearing View Document Mason MinutesJudicial Officer
Butler, Tirsa C
09/19/2022 Restraining Order View Document Restraining OrderJudicial Officer
Butler, Tirsa C
09/19/2022 Order Re Adequate Cause Granted View Document Order Re Adequate Cause GrantedJudicial Officer
Butler, Tirsa C
09/19/2022 Parenting Plan Temporary View Document Parenting Plan TemporaryJudicial Officer
Butler, Tirsa C
09/20/2022 Affidavit Declaration Certificate Confirmation of Service View Document Affidavit Declaration Certificate Confirmation of Service
09/23/2022 Affidavit Declaration Certificate Confirmation of Service View Document Affidavit Declaration Certificate Confirmation of Service
09/26/2022 Show Cause/Contempt Original Type
Show Cause/ContemptView Document Mason MinutesJudicial Officer
Butler, Tirsa CHearing Time
9:00 AMResult
HeldComment
Received confirmation phone call on 9/21/22 @3:36 pm from Tera Reed – SLParties PresentPetitioner (WIP): LEWIS, ELMER ALLENRespondent (WIP): REED, TERA ANN
09/26/2022 Contempt Hearing View Document Mason MinutesJudicial Officer
Butler, Tirsa C
09/26/2022 Order on Contempt View Document Order on ContemptJudicial Officer
Butler, Tirsa C
09/28/2022 JIS Check Confidential Document Cover Sheet
09/28/2022 JIS Check Confidential Document Cover Sheet
11/08/2022 Motion for Temporary Order View Document Motion for Temporary Order
11/08/2022 Proposed Parenting Plan View Document Proposed Parenting Plan
11/08/2022 Declaration Affidavit View Document Declaration Affidavit
11/08/2022 Notice of Hearing View Document Notice of Hearing
11/08/2022 Affidavit Declaration Certificate Confirmation of Service View Document Affidavit Declaration Certificate Confirmation of Service
11/21/2022 Temporary Parenting Plan Original Type
Temporary Parenting PlanView Document Mason MinutesJudicial Officer
Butler, Tirsa CHearing Time
9:00 AMResult
HeldComment
ELMER CONF BY PHONE ON 11/15/22 AT 11:35AM HWParties PresentPetitioner (WIP): LEWIS, ELMER ALLEN
11/21/2022 Motion Hearing View Document Mason MinutesJudicial Officer
Butler, Tirsa C
11/21/2022 Parenting Plan Temporary View Document Parenting Plan TemporaryJudicial Officer
Butler, Tirsa C
01/11/2023 Motion Hearing View Document Motion HearingJudicial Officer
Goodell, Daniel LComment
EXPARTE
01/11/2023 Restrained Persons Motion to Terminate PO View Document Restrained Persons Motion to Terminate PO
01/11/2023 Motion to Dismiss View Document Motion to Dismiss
01/11/2023 Declaration Affidavit View Document Declaration Affidavit
01/11/2023 Declaration Affidavit View Document Declaration Affidavit
01/11/2023 Statement View Document StatementComment
EXHIBIT 1
01/11/2023 Statement View Document StatementComment
EXHIBIT 2
01/11/2023 Order Denying Motion Petition View Document Order Denying Motion PetitionJudicial Officer
Goodell, Daniel L
04/04/2023 Notice of Appearance View Document Notice of Appearance
04/13/2023 Affidavit Declaration Certificate Confirmation of Service View Document Affidavit Declaration Certificate Confirmation of Service
04/13/2023 Motion View Document MotionComment
Motion and Declaration for order waving mediation requirement and scheduling trial date
04/13/2023 Notice of Hearing View Document Notice of Hearing
04/26/2023 Waive Mediation/Arbitration Original Type
Waive Mediation/ArbitrationJudicial Officer
Sauerlender, Robert DHearing Time
1:30 PMResult
HeldComment
and set trial date Elmer called to confirm 4/20/2023 @ 9:35am. HB Renee Stein (RStein Law) confirmed via email on 4.24.23 at 12:46pm AHParties PresentPetitioner (WIP): LEWIS, ELMER ALLENRespondent (WIP): REED, TERA ANNAttorney: Stein, Renee’ Elizabeth
04/26/2023 Declaration of Mailing View Document Declaration of MailingComment
E-Mailed
04/26/2023 Affidavit Declaration Certificate Confirmation of Service View Document Affidavit Declaration Certificate Confirmation of ServiceComment
Hand-Delivered
04/26/2023 Order View Document Order
06/05/2023 Settlement Conference Judicial Officer
Goodell, Daniel LHearing Time
1:30 PM
06/05/2023 Settlement Conference Hearing Held View Document Settlement Conference Hearing Held
09/28/2023 Pre-Trial Conference Judicial Officer
Cobb, Monty DHearing Time
8:30 AM
10/25/2023 Non-Jury Trial Hearing Time
9:00 AM
10/26/2023 Non-Jury Trial Hearing Time
9:00 AM
10/27/2023 Non-Jury Trial Hearing Time
9:00 AM

Posted in Uncategorized | 2 Comments

How Trial Works: Divorce & Family Law | WA

Posted on June 13, 2023 by admin

by Samuel K. Darling, Bellevue Divorce and Family Law Attorney

This article explains how divorce and family law trials work in Washington State, and it’s written with the expectation you might try representing yourself, sometimes called “pro se” representation. Despite skimming over many details, this explains what we think the typical family law litigant most needs to know. It’s divided into eight parts, which you can skip to by clicking these links:

1) Overview of Trial,
2) Local Rules,
3) 35+ Days Before Trial,
4) Two Weeks Before Trial (the most important part),
5) Pretrial (the morning of trial),
6) Trial, and
7) Entry of Orders

I. Overview of Trial.

Unless the parties settle beforehand, divorce and family law cases end in a “bench trial”. That means the final decision come from a judge. There is no jury.

People typically begin preparing for trial over a month in advance, and those preparations become rigorous the two weeks prior to trial.

During the preparation stage, each party usually drafts a trial notebook for submission to the court and the other parties. Each copy of a trial notebook should contain, at a minimum, the parties’ trial brief and intended exhibits.

The trial itself has four stages: 1) opening statements (optional), 2) presentation of live testimony and exhibits, 3) closing arguments, and 4) the judge’s decision.

Opening statements are an opportunity to explain the case to the judge. Petitioner goes first, followed by respondent, followed by other parties, if any.

After opening statements, petitioner has the opportunity to present testimony and exhibits. This is done by calling witnesses forward to sit in front of the judge and answer questions.

When a party calls a witness to testify, it’s referred to as direct examination, or simply direct. Upon completion of petitioner’s direct examination of a witness, respondent can cross examine the same witness, sometimes simply called cross. If there are other parties, they can take turns crossing the witness as well. Then petitioner can ask questions of that same witness again, called re-direct. Finally the other parties can once again cross examine the witness, called re-cross. Typically the parties finish examining a witness – direct, cross, re-direct, and re-cross – before moving on to another witness. All petitioners witnesses go one after the other.

Respondent calls witnesses next. The process is essentially the same as when petitioner called witnesses. It begins with respondent’s direct examination of the witnesses, followed by petitioner and other parties cross examining the witness, followed by re-direct, and re-cross.

Once respondent has no more witnesses, other parties, if any, call theirs.

Parties introduce exhibits – usually documents – through the witnesses’ testimony. The witnesses have to provide foundation for the exhibits to come into evidence. Foundation means establishing basic information about an exhibit and the witness’s knowledge of it.

Parties sporadically object during presentation of witnesses and exhibits. For example, a party might say “Objection, hearsay”. The judge will then rule one whether the witnesses’ statement or the proffered exhibit should be allowed. The judge will usually give his or her decision by saying “sustained” or “denied”. These terms can be confusing even though we frequently see people use them on TV. “Sustained” means the court agrees with the objection, and the witness’s statement or exhibit is DISALLOWED. “Denied” means the court disagrees with the objection, and the witness’s statement or exhibit is “allowed in”. The phrase “allowed in” or “comes in” means the judge can consider the information when rendering his or her final decision in the case.

After each party has finished calling all his or her witnesses, the petitioner is allowed to call rebuttal witnesses. The process is the same – direct, cross, re-direct, and re-cross. Respondent can then call rebuttal witnesses, followed by other parties’ rebuttal witnesses, if any.

Once all parties have “rested” (are finished calling witnesses), it’s time for closing arguments. Each party is allowed to orally explain why he or she should win. As usual, petitioner goes first, then respondent, followed by any other parties.

At last, the judge renders a decision.

II. Local Rules.

Each of Washington’s counties have their own applicable local rules in addition to what this article explains. You can find each counties’ local rules here. You might try at least reading the local civil rule on trial assignment (usually local civil rule 40) and any local rules for divorce and family law proceedings (try searching the local rules for the keywords “divorce”, “family law”, and “domestic”). You should also follow any scheduling order the county court issues in your case. Scheduling orders sometimes create unique procedural requirements, such as the need to disclose witnesses and evidence before trial. The county’s family law facilitator(s) can help you follow the county’s scheduling orders and local court rules. Meeting with a family law facilitator costs about $10 per session, and facilitators are typically located in the county’s superior court building.

Aside from the scheduling order and local rules, this guide probably explains the most essential aspect of your upcoming trial.

III. 35+ Days Before Trial.

Ideally you should start planning your trial at least 35 days in advance. The focus of this early preparation is identifying your intended exhibits and witnesses, if you haven’t already. No state-level rule requires you to disclose your exhibits or witnesses to the other party prior to trial, but disclosure might be necessary under local rules, a scheduling order, or a discovery request. Our firm has or will write a separate article on discovery.

You’ll want to determine your exhibits and witnesses promptly even if there is no early disclosure requirement applicable to you. As explained next, you’ll need to know your intended exhibits and witnesses to draft an ER 904 notice and arrange witness testimony.

1. ER 904 Notice. If at all possible, you should submit an ER 904 notice at least 30 days before trial. ER 904 stands for Washington Evidence Rule 904. In short, this evidence rule allows you to propose to the opposing party your intended exhibits at least 30 days in advance of trial. Any documents on the list become automatically admissible at trial unless the other side objects to them within 14 days of receiving the notice.

The idea is to make it faster and easier for undisputed, trustworthy documents to come in. Documents that commonly come into evidence this way include bank statements, credit card statements, bills and invoices, the parties’ family pictures, medical records, text messages, and police reports.

Getting documents in this way can greatly increase your odds of winning, especially if you don’t have an attorney. It’s common for unrepresented parties to have extreme difficulty getting documents admitted into evidence at trial otherwise. The evidence rules for trial are complex and often require you to introduce documents using the right words and witnesses. For example, business documents that don’t come in through ER 904 usually need to be “authenticated” at trial by the business’s “records custodian”. That’s a mess you should avoid if you can. You might consider offering all your intended exhibits through ER 904 if you’re pro se.

Our firm’s template ER 904 notice is available here. Of course remove any reference to our firm. Then fill out the template, number and attach each of your exhibits, make copies, and have an adult (other than you) deliver a set directly to the opposing party or drop off the set at opposing counsel’s office. Have the same person deliver identical sets to all parties in the case, such as the Guardian ad Litem and the state prosecutor’s office, if they’re involved in the case. Save a set for yourself. Then court file the notice WITHOUT the attached exhibits. Have the person who delivered the documents take note of the date deliveries occurred, and include him or her among your intended trial witnesses. You’ll need him or her to testify about submitting the ER 904 notice on time.

If you need to object to any documents an opposing party has offered under ER 904, here is our firm’s template. Fill it out, deliver copies to the parties or their attorneys, keep a copy for yourself, and court file the original. Don’t object to all the other side’s documents out of spite. The trial judge can sanction you for objecting without basis.

2. Subpoena/Notify Witnesses. Once you’ve figured who you intend to call as your witnesses, make arrangements for them to testify live at trial. Arranging for testimony often entails nothing more than asking witnesses to show up in-person. Telephonic testimony, video testimony, affidavits, and written declarations generally aren’t allowed. Judges will occasionally allow telephonic or video testimony, but only in extreme circumstances, such as during the COVID pandemic.

You probably shouldn’t arrange for your children to testify, especially if they’re minors and the children of the opposing party. Washington calls it “putting the children in the middle”, and it can lead to a presumption you’re a bad parent.

If a witness might not show up voluntarily, subpoena him or her. You can find our firm’s template subpoena by clicking here. Only fill out the relevant sections. The subpoena should be served upon the witness directly if possible, and the person effecting service should fill out a document proving service took place. The template for proof of service is here. A trial subpoena subjects witnesses to possible arrest if they don’t show up to testify.

Subpoenas cannot force a witness to travel long distances. You can find the geographic limitations of subpoenas in CR 45(e)(2).

Obtaining deposition testimony from uncooperative witnesses who live far away is possible but difficult and expensive. An explanation would exceed the scope of this article unfortunately.

IV. Two Weeks Before Trial (the most important part).

Preparation can make all the difference, so attorneys (or at least good attorneys) often dedicate themselves exclusively to trial-related work during the week or two in advance. You should do the same if you want to perform well.

This is where you essentially draft nearly everything you intend to say and do at trial. Unexpected events always occur, which means these plans cannot be rigid. But your preparations should be thorough. The most famous and successful trial attorneys have one thing in common – careful and complete preparation.

It is also advisable to have a theme, or story, that you weave throughout the trial. A theme might be something such as “the other party is highly abusive and controlling”, “the other party lies a lot”, or “I just need enough financial help to finish college”. A story might be a simple, easy-to-summarize plot that the judge can relate to. Weave that theme or story into everything you do to the extent possible. Otherwise the facts you present at trial will seem unconnected to the judge, and he or she will be less likely to remember them. With any theme or story for trial, repeat it. Emphasize the key points in the evidence you present. The judge should be reciting your theme/story in his or her sleep after the trial. To accomplish this, you should weave it into all your drafting preparations.

The following are typical preparations during the two-week homestretch.

1. Trial Confirmation. Depending on the court’s local rules, you might need to “confirm” around two weeks prior to your trial date. Confirmation signals to the court that you intend to go forward with the trial. If confirmation is required and no party does it, the court usually strikes the trial date. Sometimes failure to confirm results in a judge dismissing the case in its entirety, forcing you to start over again. Generally you’ll have received something in writing warning you of the need to confirm, if applicable. To be on the safe side, you might ask the county’s family law facilitator whether confirmation is necessary and how it’s done.

2. Exhibits. Print and number your anticipated exhibits.

3. Outlines. You should draft outlines of what you intend to say at trial. Those outlines typically include the following:

A. Opening Statement. Opening statement is an opportunity to orally convey what type of case it is, what you are asking for, and the facts of the case. You are not allowed to “argue”. In this context, argue means to construe the facts, mention the law, or explain why you should win. You can simply state what happened, without coloration. If you state the right facts in the right order, the listener often emotionally sides with you anyhow.

Given that there is no jury, opening statements tend to be redundant of what you will write to the court in your trial brief. Family law attorneys often agree ahead of time to waive opening statements in an effort to reduce preparation time.

If you do not waive your opening statement, you should expect to spend significant time on it. Create a bullet point outline, and practice, practice, practice. Don’t expect to read it to the judge. Reading an opening statement largely defeats the point and can even cause the judge annoyance. Instead rehearse enough that you can look the judge in the eye and speak with inflection.

B. Direct Examination Questions for Each Witness You Intend to Call. Direct examination is the term for asking questions of yourself and your own witnesses. You should outline the questions you intend to ask, often with a bullet point list or on some index cards. This ensures you don’t waste the court’s time thinking of what to say at trial. Wasting time makes judges grumpy.

Leading questions generally aren’t allowed on direct examination. A leading question is one that suggests the answer to the witness, essentially leading him or her to answer with the details you want. Yes or no questions are often leading, but not always. Typically a question is leading if it includes significant information that has not yet come into evidence. This is probably leading: “John got angry, start yelling, and then punch my son in the nose two weeks ago, correct?” This probably is not: “Has John hit my children?” Admittedly, the determination of whether a question is leading is a gray area.

Judges sometimes grant permission to ask leading questions on direct if your witness demonstrates evasiveness or hostility towards you. This might happen if you call one of the opposing party’s family members as a witness to a domestic violence incident. Ask the judge for “permission to treat the witness as hostile.” If the judge grants your request, leading questions are allowed.

Witnesses generally cannot testify about hearsay. Hearsay is an out-of-court statement offered to prove the truth of the statement. It’s a difficult and nuanced definition, but typically hearsay means relating someone else’s out-of-court communication. For example, “Sally said John hit her” is probably hearsay. The speaker doesn’t have firsthand knowledge of whether John hit Sally. The speaker is retelling what Sally said. You’d need someone who saw the event or the physical aftermath to explain what he or she saw. Organize your questions to avoid hearsay if possible.

There are many exceptions to the hearsay rule, most of which are relatively rare. The most common exception is a statement by the other party, called “admission of a party opponent”. A witness can testify about what the other side communicated. For example, in a divorce you could say “My spouse said John hit Sally.”

Introduce all your intended exhibits through your own testimony or your witnesses, if possible. Introducing the exhibits through your witnesses is easier than trying to do it through the other side’s. Presumably your witnesses will want to cooperate; the other side’s might not.

Admission of ER 904 documents can often be done by agreement with the other side on the record. If not, you can call as witness the person who served the ER 904 notice. You just need to establish that the documents were served on time and the other side made no objection within the 14-day window. Then ask the court to admit the documents into evidence.

Introducing exhibits that don’t come in through ER 904 can be trickier, because you need to establish foundation. Generally the following script will work:

[You:] Your Honor, I am handing to the witness what I had pre-marked as document [#]. [Hand the document to the witness.]
[You to the witness:] Do you recognize this document?
[Witness:] Yes.
[You to the witness:] What is it?
[Witness says what the document is.]
[You to the witness:] How do you know?
[Witness explains how he or she knows about the document, such as if he or she drafted it, created, etc.]
[You:] I move to admit this into evidence.
[Judge rules on whether to admit.]

Usually written documents should be introduced through someone with first-hand knowledge of them, such as the person who drafted them, created them, or can verify circumstances suggesting the opposing party drafted or created them.

Practice with your witnesses so you know what they’ll answer to your questions. At trial, you should never ask a witness a question unless you know the answer.

C. Cross Examination of Opposing Party’s Anticipated Witnesses. Cross examination is when you pose questions to the other side and his or her witnesses. The main difference between direct and cross is you can ask leading questions. In fact, most questions on cross are leading. Done right, it’s almost as if you’re testifying and simply asking the other side to confirm. Never ask a question on cross unless you know the answer and can prove it with a reliable document. Otherwise the question is likely to lead to an answer that hurts your position. Take the following script as an example of effective cross:

[You to the opposing party:] Isn’t it true you punched our son in the head two weeks ago?
[Opposing party:] No, that’s not true.
[You:] Your Honor, I’m handing the witness Exhibit 10.
[You hand the witness a police incident report.]
[You:] What is this document?
[Opposing party:] I dunno.
[You:] Isn’t this the police incident report from two weeks ago?
[Opposing party:] Maybe.
[You:] Would you mind flipping to page two, lines 11-13?
[Opposing party flips to the page.]
[You:] Isn’t that your statement to the police?
[Opposing party:] It might be.
[You:] Isn’t that your name and signature at the bottom of the page?
[Opposing party:] Maybe.
[You:] On lines 11-13, doesn’t it say, quote “During the fight, I got so mad I punched him in the nose”?
[Opposing party:] Maybe.

You aren’t supposed to harass or argue with a witness on cross. Questions can be deemed argumentative. Save argument for closing arguments, which is next.

D. Closing Argument. Closing argument is your last word to the judge before he or she renders a decision. In it, you can talk about the facts, the law, and why you think you should win. You cannot refer to facts that weren’t part of allowed oral testimony or in the admitted exhibits.

Some attorneys prefer drafting their closing arguments in advance, ensuring adequate time to write and rehearse. Others prefer waiting until the end of trial, so they can structure the argument according to what transpires. Like with opening statements, you should avoid reading to the judge if possible. Use an outline, try to look the judge in the eye, and speak with inflection. Speak slowly. Speaking slowly helps with your delivery and allows the judge to take notes. Judges often write their thoughts nonstop during closing arguments.

4. Trial Brief. Your trial brief is what you submit in writing to the judge (and other parties). It should tell the court your position, the most relevant facts, and any law you’d like to bring to the court’s attention. Click here for an example.

Along with your trial brief, you should provide your proposed parenting plan (if relevant), your proposed child support worksheets (if relevant), your financial declaration (if any financial issues are at stake), and an asset/debt spreadsheet (if dividing property). Click here for an example asset/debt spreadsheet. Include the parenting plan, proposed child support worksheets, financial declaration, and asset/debt spreadsheet as exhibits in addition to being trial brief attachments.

5. Motions in Limine. Motions in limine are motions at the beginning of trial. Usually they pertain to evidentiary issues, such as whether to allow witness to testify by phone. Those same issues can be addressed when they arise during the trial, but presenting them as motions in limine can be better for you and the court, because it provides an opportunity to fully brief the court on the issue. Click here for an example motion in limine. Self-represented parties rarely file motions in limine, but they should if they have the time.

6. Pocket Briefs. A pocket brief is like a motion in limine’s little brother. It’s an evidentiary brief you can use during the middle of the case if an anticipated evidentiary issue arises. Click here for an example. Pocket briefs are rare for both attorneys and self-represented parties, but they can provide a significant advantage. Our firm uses them regularly.

7. Trial Notebook. A trial notebook is an organized compilation of the documents you are supposed to provide to everyone at the beginning of trial. It typically consists of a table of contents, your trial brief (and attachments, if any), your motion(s) in limine, a numbered list of your intended exhibits, and each of your exhibits.

Usually you prepare four sets – one for the opposing party, a working copy for the judge, the original for the clerk (the official set), and one for yourself. If there are additional parties, such as a GAL or state prosecutor, you should prepare sets for them as well. Judges appreciate if you hole-punch each set, place each set in its own three-ring binder, and tab your exhibits with their numbers.

V. Pretrial (the day of trial).

Some counties assign cases to trial judges in advance of trial. In other counties, you show up for “trial call” on the morning of your trial date for assignment to a judge. Once you learn of your judge, you walk to his or her courtroom with all your documents.

Unless local rules say otherwise, you give the trial notebooks to their intended recipients when you reach your assigned judge’s courtroom. If local rules did not require advance notice of motions in limine, you should inform the clerk if you have any motions you want heard. Then you wait, often for several hours, while everyone reviews each other’s trial notebooks. The judge usually reviews them in an office behind the courtroom. Take this chance to review the other side’s motions in limine and exhibits. Make notes of what you intend to say in response to the motion(s) and any objections you intend to make to exhibits. You might want to speak with opposing counsel about agreeing to the admission of exhibits you don’t intend to object to.

In some counties, such as King County, much of this information will have been exchanged in advance of trial, and there will be no need to review trial notebooks. Trial begins immediately.

VI. Trial.

Honestly, most of the work is done by the time you get to this point. You’ve already prepared everything, and now you just put that preparation into play in the following order:

1. Opening Statements. As mentioned above, opening statements are optional. You can object to the opposing party’s opening statement if he or she goes beyond the scope of what is allowed. The objection is typically phased, “objection, argumentative.”

2. Motions in Limine. Each party is allowed to present his or her motions in limine, the other party is allowed to orally respond, and the court makes rulings.

3. Testimony and Evidence. After any motions in limine, petitioner is allowed to put on his or her case. As mentioned above, this means petitioner calls each of his or her witnesses for direct examination. After direct examination, there may be cross, re-direct, and re-cross. Re-direct is limited to asking questions that rebut cross examination, and re-direct is similarly limited to rebutting or clarifying the answers to re-direct. Re-direct and re-cross are rare. Often our firm’s attorneys don’t even cross, because we can usually get the same information in through our own witnesses, who are more cooperative.

Then the other parties are allowed to put on witnesses, potentially followed by rebuttal witnesses. See sections I (overview) and IV(3)(b)&(c) (direct and cross examination) for a reminder of how this works.

There are countless objections at this stage in the case, but the most common are “hearsay” and “foundation”. As discussed above, hearsay typically means the witness has related what someone said rather than relating his or her first-hand knowledge. A party can also object to a document as hearsay if it contains an out-of-court statement. That’s yet another reason you hopefully got your documents in through ER 904, discussed in section III(1), above.

Foundation usually means the witness has not demonstrated he or she has sufficient knowledge to introduce an exhibit. If you encounter this objection, remember the script from section IV(3)(b), above. You can often cure an objection and still get the document or information. You do so by asking the witness the appropriate question(s) to overcome the basis for the objection.

4. Closing Arguments. Once all parties have rested, the court usually takes a short recess or adjourns for the parties to finalize their closing arguments. Once trial resumes, petitioner presents oral argument first, followed by respondent. Then the court typically gives petitioner the opportunity for a short rebuttal, called a reply.

5. Judge’s Decision. The judge usually adjourns to review exhibits and draft an oral or memorandum decision. The decision is usually ready several days or weeks later. Memorandum decisions are typically sent to the parties, so there is no need to return to the courtroom for the result. If the judge elects to render an oral decision, the parties return to the courtroom upon a date set by the judge. The parties take notes while the judge states or reads the oral decision. Don’t worry too much about getting all the information in your notes. A court reporter transcribes the oral decision, and either party can order the transcript.

VII. Entering Orders.

After the decision is rendered, the substantially prevailing party customarily drafts final orders for the court’s signature. You can usually find templates for the final orders on the state’s mandatory forms website. For example, a divorce trial would often end with entry of a decree, findings of fact, parenting plan, child support order, and child support worksheets, which you can find in this section of the state’s mandatory forms website. Once the prevailing party has drafted the orders, he or she sends them to the other party to review. Typically the other party requests changes. If the parties can agree to the wording of the final orders, they sign and submit them to the judge for entry. If they cannot agree, the judge or one of the parties sets a presentation hearing, where the judge resolves the drafting disputes and signs the orders into effect. If the court is entering a parenting plan, the parties must submit to a JIS background check so the judge can determine whether the child(ren) would be safe in each parties’ care. The court will typically walk a pro se party through the JIS process.

That’s it! We hope you found this article useful. We at Genesis believe in making high quality legal information freely available on the internet. You can find many more articles, guides, and videos by clicking our website’s resources tab.

Recommended Articles & Videos:

Comment below to tell us and other readers about our article(s), how we can improve them, and additional topics you would like our article(s) to address.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

The Best Free Legal Research Tools

Posted on June 13, 2023 by admin

Written by Teresa Matich, Joshua Lenon

9 minutes well spent

7 Free legal search engines and databases

1. Fastcase: For an online law library

2. CourtListener: For legal opinions

3. Caselaw Access Project: For book-published case law

4. FindLaw: For searchable Supreme Court decisions

5. Legal Information Institute: For US law online and a legal encyclopedia

6. Casetext and ROSS: For AI assistance

7. Justia: For the latest summaries sent straight to you

Beyond legal databases: Other free research resources

1. Primary sources: For going straight to the source

2. Legal blogs: For keeping up-to-date

3. Google Scholar: For searching legal journals and published opinions Conclusion

Free legal research tools used to be a dream. High-quality legal research is a necessity for all law firms—after all, finding the right precedent or statute could give you the edge to win your case—but does it have to be expensive?

In the past, paid research platforms were the only choice, so we accepted legal research tools as a costly-but-necessary expense for law firms. Today, however, the landscape of the industry has changed dramatically, with numerous excellent free tools available online—making free legal research a viable option for law firms looking to allocate funds to other areas of their practice, without compromising the quality of their research.

The only catch? You have to know where to look.

Below, we’ve collected some of the best free legal research tools for law firms. Whether you want to add in new resources to your legal research portfolio or paid legal research is straining your firm’s budget, these free tools will help you present your best case—without the big financial investment.

7 Free legal search engines and databases

The combination of more legal resources being digitized and the development of new technologies means that there’s now an overwhelming amount of legal information that can be found online. The good news? Many of these legal research resources can be found online for free (If you want to really dive deep, browse this comprehensive resource for an in-depth listing of free legal research options.)

Below, we’ve curated seven of the best free search engines and databases help you sort through the information to find exactly what you need for your legal research:

1. Fastcase: For an online law library

As one of the largest online law libraries in the world, Fastcase provides online access to case law, statutes, regulations, constitutions, court rules, and law review articles—making legal research and analysis faster and easier.

And, thanks to an integration with Clio, using Fastcase makes it simple to accurately monitor the time you spend on legal research and keep your research well-ordered. Without ever having to leave Fastcase, the Clio integration allows you to:

Create Clio time entries for time spent on research
Save your results as case documents in Clio
Keep your research organized according to each case

While Fastcase offers a variety of paid desktop plans (you can try a free trial to test them out), their free mobile app is available for iOS, Android, and Windows Phone—and anyone with the app can access Fastcase’s comprehensive legal research database on the go, for free.

Fastcase also has the most member benefit deals with bar associations of any legal research provider. You may already have access through your bar dues.

2. CourtListener: For legal opinions

Sponsored by the Non-Profit Free Law Project, CourtListener is a legal research website featuring millions of legal opinions from federal and state courts. Search CourtListener by case name, topic, or citation—the data is all free to access and updated daily.

3. Caselaw Access Project: For book-published case law

As part of a mission to make all published US court decisions freely available to publish online, the Caselaw Access Project (CAP) offers free access to all official, book-published US case law—every volume designated as an official report of decisions by a court within the United States through June 2018 (Fun fact: The earliest case available is from 1658.). The 360 years of United States case law data was digitized from the collection of the Harvard Law Library.

4. FindLaw: For searchable Supreme Court decisions

Designed to make the law more accessible to all, FindLaw’s FindLaw for Legal Professionals division offers free online legal content including case law from state and federal courts, case summaries, statutes, and legal news.

FindLaw also offers a browsable, searchable database of US Supreme Court decisions since 1760. Browse Supreme Court opinions by year and US Reports volume number, or search by party name, case title, citation, full text, and docket number. FindLaw also features an archive of Supreme Court opinion summaries since the year 2000.

5. Legal Information Institute: For US law online and a legal encyclopedia

Legal Information Institutes (LII) are a global resource that offers open access to law knowledge. There are over 46 LII associations around the world that publish source law through their own search engines, providing freely accessible case laws, regulations, and statutes unique to those countries.

The Legal Information Institute (LII) at Cornell Law School provides access to most US laws online for free, making it a good resource when you need to find a statute or regulation, while also providing online access to legal materials like the:

Supreme Court Bulletin
State statutes by topic
US Code
Electronic Code of Federal Regulations (e-CFR)
Constitution
Federal Rules
Uniform Commercial Code
World law

Another free research resource hosted by LII is Wex—a free, community-built legal dictionary and legal encyclopedia created and edited by legal experts.

6. Casetext and ROSS: For AI assistance

Technically, number six on this list isn’t free, but low-cost artificial intelligence-powered options for legal research can make a huge difference for your bottom line. Powered by AI to help you conduct legal research better and faster, Casetext’s search finds you cases and other authorities on the same facts, legal issues, and jurisdiction as your matter.

The process is simple: Drag and drop a brief or complaint, and Casetext’s artificial intelligence search, CARA, finds relevant cases—whether to enhance your research for your own drafts, or to check for missing or omitted cases within opposing council’s briefs and complaints. The practice is even smoother via Casetext’s Clio integration, which lets you send a document from Clio to CARA in a single click.

Casetext’s AI search is a paid-but-low-cost option for legal research—though you can try for free with a 14-day trial.

A paid subscription to ROSS Intelligence is another way to leverage AI to enhance your legal research. Ross’s AI-powered tool lets you focus your research by emphasizing the unique facts of your case, and helps you identify cases with the same procedural posture presented in your case, plus much more.

7. Justia: For the latest summaries sent straight to you

Research case law, codes, statutes, regulations, and articles related to federal and state cases with Justia’s extensive, free database.

And, for staying effortlessly well-informed on specific practice areas, Justia will send the latest straight to your inbox with an array of free newsletters ranging from daily summaries of opinions from all federal appellate courts and all 50 state supreme courts to weekly summaries of opinions in certain practice areas.

Beyond legal databases: Other free research resources

As valuable as legal databases are for your case research, there are also other alternative sources where you can find information and resources to support your legal research. Below, we offer a few free and cost-effective options for help build your case.

1. Primary sources: For going straight to the source

Sometimes, the easiest way to get the information you need is to be direct. You can find many case law and court documents online for free. Legislatures and courts are publishing their own materials, which are sometimes available online as downloadable PDFs—a convenience that until recently has never existed. However, keep in mind that some online versions are not considered “official” and can be refuted by the print version, even though they come from the same source.

Here are some resources you can access directly online:

US Office of the Law Revision Counsel
Bound Volumes of the Supreme Court
Rulings from regulatory and administrative agencies like, Social Security Administration, Financial Crimes Enforcement Network, and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

Keep in mind, however, that while this information might be easy to access through primary sources, you’ll likely miss out on the advanced search functions or analysis features that you’d find with legal search engines and databases.

Also, older legal information may not be available online yet. In this situation, visiting a library may be helpful as you will be able to find archived legal information that is unavailable elsewhere. Also, you may find potential collaborators in your colleagues (and the librarians) who will be researching there as well. These collaborators will be a great source for information on what arguments worked in the past, and may help you find local knowledge you might not be able to uncover yourself.

If you are a member of a bar association, you should also make full use of the resources available to you through your member benefits, such as:

Courthouses
Law schools
Bar Association headquarters

2. Legal blogs: For keeping up-to-date

One of the best ways to become a more efficient legal researcher is to stay ahead of the game. The best way to do that? Maintain your subject matter competency by keeping up-to-date on the latest developments in your practice area by regularly reading legal journals and legal blogs.

A great place to find the best of the best when it comes to legal blogs is through the American Bar Association (ABA)’s annual list, which started in 2007 as the Blawg 100 list of blogs, and has evolved into the Web 100 list of favorite law blogs, podcasts, tweeters, and web tools—a.k.a. a list of the best free law-focused resources and people to follow.

LexBlog—an online network of over 22,000 legal bloggers—is a hub of the latest commentary on the law. Sorting blogs by channels, LexBlog makes it easy to find and subscribe to legal blogs that focus on your specific area of law.

The direct research benefit of staying in the loop? By maintaining subject-matter competency, you’ll already have certain cases and ideas in mind—so that when you’re presented with a case, you won’t be starting from scratch every time.

3. Google Scholar: For searching legal journals and published opinions

While not specifically tailored to legal research, Google Scholar allows you to broadly search and access scholarly literature—which means it’s an effective, free way to find legal documents like patents, legal opinions, legal journals, and articles.

Want the simplest way to search case law? On the Google Scholar main page, select the “Case Law” button under the search box to easily search case law, filtered by jurisdiction.

Conclusion

Conducting smart legal research that’s thorough, accurate, and time-effective makes a big difference to the success of your law firm—but it doesn’t have to be expensive.

Whether paid legal research platforms are out of the firm’s budget or you just want to find cost-effective ways to conduct thorough research for your cases, today’s free legal research resources help you be more efficient so you can serve your clients more effectively—and stay a step ahead of the competition.

How can I do legal research for free?

According to the American Bar Association (ABA), GovInfo offers free virtual access to congressional reports, official federal government publications, public laws, congressional records, hearings, and more. Do your research, as there are free and low-cost databases and tools available.

What software is used for legal research?

There are many legal research softwares available today, including Tracers, Casetext, and Fastcase. These programs integrate seamlessly with legal practice management software such as Clio.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

King County LCR7(b)(5) – Motion Format & Style

Posted on June 9, 2023 by admin

(5) Form of Motion and Responsive Pleadings.
           (A) Notice of Court Date.  A Notice of Court Date shall be filed with the motion. The Notice shall identify the moving party, the names and service addresses of all parties requiring notice, the title of the motion, the name of the hearing judge, the trial date, the date for hearing, and the time of the hearing if it is a motion for which oral argument will be held. A Notice of Court Date form is available from the clerk’s office and online:
www.kingcounty.gov/courts/clerk/forms.
           (B) Form of Motions and of Responsive Pleadings. The motion shall be combined with the memorandum of authorities into a single document, and shall conform to the following format:
               (i) Relief Requested. The specific relief the court is requested to grant or deny.
               (ii) Statement of Facts. A succinct statement of the facts contended to be material.
               (iii) Statement of Issues. A concise statement of the issue or issues of law upon which the Court is requested to rule.
               (iv) Evidence Relied Upon.  The evidence on which the motion or opposition is based must be specified with particularity. Deposition testimony, discovery pleadings, and documentary evidence relied upon must be quoted verbatim or a photocopy of relevant pages must be attached to a declaration identifying the documents. Parties should highlight those parts upon which they place substantial reliance. Copies of cases shall not be attached to original pleadings. Responsive pleadings shall conform to this format.
               (v) Authority. Any legal authority relied upon must be cited. Copies of all cited non-Washington authorities upon which parties place substantial reliance shall be provided to the hearing judicial officer and to counsel or parties, but shall not be filed with the clerk. See LCR 5(k).
               (vi) Word Limits. Absent prior authorization from the court, the initial motion and opposing memorandum shall not exceed 4,200 words; and reply memoranda shall not exceed 1,750 words. The word count includes all portions of the motion/memorandum, including headings and footnotes, except 1) the caption; 2) tables of contents and/or authorities, if any; and 3) the signature block. The signature block shall include the certification of the signer as to the number of words, substantially as follows: “I certify that this memorandum contains _____ words, in compliance with the Local Civil Rules.”
(vii) Consecutive Page Numbering for Attachments. Attachments or exhibits to any filed document, in excess of 25 pages, including motions, oppositions, replies, briefs, declarations, and affidavits, whether in paper or electronic form, shall be numbered consecutively on the bottom center or right-hand corner of each document to aid the court and the parties in navigating through the document. The number shall not restart for each attachment but shall run consecutively through all the attachments to the document. All motions, oppositions, replies, and briefs shall cite to these page numbers. A party may include other citation information, such as exhibit numbers, corresponding exhibit pages or paragraph numbers, in addition to the consecutive page cite.
(C) Form of Proposed Orders; E-mail Addresses. The moving party and any party opposing the motion shall include with their submissions a proposed order. The original of each proposed order shall be submitted to the hearing judge along with any working copies. If the motion is to be considered without oral argument, the moving party shall at the time of filing the motion provide to the court e-mail addresses for the court’s use in providing courtesy copies of entered orders. Where working copies are provided via the clerk’s eWorking Copies application, the parties shall request courtesy copies of entered order(s) through the clerk’s application.

Appellate RAP Form 18 (Motion)

Form 18 Motion

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Protecting Child Sex-Crime Victims: Civil Liberties

Posted on June 8, 2023 by admin

Protecting Child Sex-Crime Victims: How Public Opinion and Political Expediency Threaten
Civil Liberties

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Mom Uses Suicide to Warn Women about Family Court

Posted on June 6, 2023 by admin

Mom Uses Suicide to Warn Women about Family Court

Freed in Death from a “Nightmare Like No Other”

The Women’s Coalition — Jun 4

A New York mom resorted to ending her life last week after fighting long and hard for custody—and failing.

Catherine Kassenoff had recently been diagnosed with terminal cancer and said she no longer had the endurance to continue to battle both cancer and custody. She completed an assisted suicide in Switzerland in what she described as an “idyllic setting”.

Catherine characterized her years in Family Court as a complete nightmare.

In the last four years of my life I have woken up every day to a nightmare like no other.

Last month Catherine was barred from seeing her girls at all, not even in the supervised visits she had endured for many years. She was not allowed to say goodbye to her children and tell them she loved them. That may have been the breaking point.

But she was a strong, outspoken woman and would not remain silent about the unjust treatment of herself and so many mothers like her in family courts.

NOT GOING OUT QUIETLY

Catherine was not about to go out quietly. She wanted her suicide to bring light to the Custody Crisis and make a difference for women struggling to keep and protect their children in Family Court.

Catherine wanted her story to serve as a warning to all women that they will likely face oppression and devastation if the father decides he wants custody. If she—federal prosecutor, counsel to a governor, with plenty of money, education, connections and resources (at least in the beginning)—could lose her children and everything she had, any woman could.

If this could happen to me, it could happen to any woman.

Saying she did not want “her demise to be in vain”, Catherine made a last post on Facebook just moments before her assisted suicide, exposing how her life had been completely destroyed by Family Court.

I have…endured the emotional devastation of being without my children for so long, homeless from…repeated ex parte evictions…from the homes I own and rented, deprivation of my property and obliteration of my life savings, the loss of my two dogs, the loss of my career and reputation, and the concomitant humiliation and ostracism from all this.

She linked a dropbox file to her post with legal documents and other evidence, including videos of her ex verbally abusing her children and her.

You will find police testimony about his abuse, medical records of his abuse, affidavits about his abuse, and more in the link.

A series of 3 Tiktok posts by @therobbieharvey have gone viral going on 30 million views! [Click on the playlist.] The third one [below], is a 7 minute update with a compilation of video clips of her ex verbally abusing and berating Catherine. It also exposes some of the complicit family court minions.

Although it feels good to expose all the immoral minions, keep in mind judges are the only ones with the power to deprive mothers of their children. They don’t really believe what evaluators, children’s attorneys, et. al. say about mothers lying, alienating, or being mentally ill; they just use their reports to hang their hat on when switching custody to the father. The buck stops with the judge(s).

It’s also not good to focus on the exes, as abusers are a dime a dozen and they cannot take children away from mothers without judicial enabling. But it is nice to know that so many people have complained to Catherine’s ex’s law firm that he has been pressured into taking a leave of absence while they supposedly investigate (as if they didn’t know).

The father has become quite the public pariah thanks to the internet and social media. Thus, in death, if not in life or Family Court, Catherine was able to hold him somewhat accountable for taking her children away and alienating them from her.

CATHERINE’S STORY

Catherine was a wonderful mother and an accomplished woman.

She was a graduate of Dartmouth and NYU and some of her jobs included: federal prosecutor, law professor, and senior counsel for a number of corporations. Her most recent job was as Special Counsel to NY Governor Kathy Hokul on the Energy & Finance Cabinet.

But none of that mattered. Catherine, an attorney herself, was never provided due process in Family Court.

Despite her stellar background, clean record, intelligence, legal knowledge, documented evidence of abuse by the father, and her children’s desire to live with her and not with him, it was he who got custody and she who was placed on supervised visits. Bogus Protective Orders against her were issued, but she was denied truly needed Protective Orders against him.

Catherine’s case followed the Custody Crisis Playbook. She was falsely accused of alienating the children and then her ex was allowed to truly alienate them from her. The children were ordered into “therapy” ostensibly to “deprogram” them from her alienation. But it was actually to brainwash them into thinking their mother was the problem—the goal being to silence them about the father’s abuse and facilitate the implementation of court orders to live with him.

All this to Accomplish the Agenda: Get the Kids under the Father’s Control.

Judge Lewis Lubell was one of four judges involved with Catherine’s case. In 2019, he gave the father sole custody and evicted her from the marital home, despite the fact she had always been the kids’ primary nurturer. He restricted her to supervised visits. Catherine eventually got him recused for having a conflict of interest with the evaluator who had recommended the custody switch.

Judge Nancy Quinn Koba (left); Judge Lewis Lubell (right)

Judge Nancy Quinn Koba was another judge who went along with the cover up of abuse and empowering of the father. She was also involved with Lizzie’s case, granting the father’s Restraining Order against her.

Judge Quinn continued to torment Catherine with infrequent, supervised contact with her children. In the end, just last month, she ordered (or allowed) no contact at all.

WHAT’S MONEY GOT TO DO WITH IT?

Much of the media and many activists are placing a gender neutral cause on the horrors inflicted on Catherine in Family Court: it must be the money…

Although it is implausible to blame lack of training or child safety laws in her case, many are placing blame on the Family Court “cottage industry”, the money being made by various court-appointees. After all, her ex spent millions and ambulance chasers made a ton in the process.

But Catherine had plenty of money before she was financially devastated via Family Court. By 2021, she had already spent $600K on the custody battle, however, she, a mere woman, was not able to keep even the supposedly presumptive joint custody—or just unsupervised visits. And in the end, she was prohibited from any contact at all.

This cannot be explained by the money hypothesis. The only plausible explanation is that the driving factor for Catherine’s—and millions of other mothers around the world—is the entrenched agenda to keep men entitled and empowered in the family, being overseen and enforced by the OBN (old boy network). [See “Down the Money Rabbit Hole” for a more in-depth discussion of this gender neutral diversion.]

UNBEARABLE PAIN

The pain Catherine endured from the loss of her children was unbearable.

I would long for the girls…I imagined who their friends were, where they went, who they spent time with, what their dreams were. I had nothing more than my own imagination to work with because for the last 3 years, I was excised from being their mother.

I could not tuck them into bed at night, take them to school, host their sleepovers, make their breakfasts, or take them on vacations. Allan wouldn’t allow any of that; the court gave him everything he wanted. I often shook from the pain of it.

Catherine was a follower of The Women’s Coalition and shared many of our posts. She recently shared Terra’s story from December: “Mom Dies Following Years of Judicial Torture: Judge Took Children, Home, Money”. She commented that Terra’s story could be hers.

Unfortunately that is what came to pass…

Catherine asked that we share her story so her life was not in vain, so please share this post and let the public know there is an epidemic of mothers losing custody!

I hope that in death I can achieve what I could not in life…I hope that the public will stand up and say enough is enough.

Rest in Peace Catherine…

Condolences to Family & Friends…

May her Children Heal, Know their Mother Fought for them & Be Treated Well…

REMEMBERING MOTHERS

Catherine joins the long list of mothers who did not make it out of Family Court alive. Following are some of the cases The Women’s Coalition has covered over the last few years. They do not include the many cases in which the mother is murdered by her ex due to having to co-parent with him.

Mom Uses Suicide to Warn Women about Family Court
Freed in Death from a “Nightmare Like No Other”THE WOMEN’S COALITION

A New York mom resorted to ending her life last week after fighting long and hard for custody—and failing.

Catherine joins the long list of mothers who did not make it out of Family Court alive. Following are some of the cases The Women’s Coalition has covered over the last few years. They do not include the many cases in which the mother is murdered by her ex due to having to co-parent with him.
Narkis: Mom Who Said “Many Women End Up Dead” Has Died
Terra: Mom Dies Following Years of Judicial Torture
Lindsay: Judge Enables Father to Murder Mother & Daughter
Anne-Christine: Dad Murders Mom: Gets Custody
Nia: Family Court Causes Another Mother’s Death
Star: Judge Denies Protective Order: Mom Stabbed to Death in Front of Son
Michelle: Family Court Causes Another Mother’s Death
Nashwa: Protective Mom Found Dead Day after Mother’s Day
Kymberlie: Woman Commits Suicide by Train on Daughter’s 16th Birthday
Nicole: Mom Murdered after Judge Orders Shared Custody
Jennifer: Missing Mom’s Ex Charged with Murder: Held on $6M Bail
Hayley: Mom of 4 Drops Dead in Court after Custody Ruling
Marissa: Face of the Crisis
Shannon: Mom Passes Away after Battling Fervently to Regain Custody
Kimi: Mom with Cancer Passes Away without Seeing Children
Sheila: Despondent Mum Commits Suicide after Kids Given to Father

RIP MOMS

REMINDER
Russ and Pat’s trial begins tomorrow in Brisbane, Australia. (Actually it is Monday in Australia already.)

If you missed it, their story of being prosecuted for helping hide mothers is here: “Everybody Knows”: New Book by Doctor Who’s on Trial for Hiding Kids from Rapist Fathers

It would be great for as many mothers as possible to be there supporting them. It is such an outrage that they are being prosecuted. We will continue to update…

Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment

07-2-01035-0 WA Employment Sec. Dept v. Shawn W Day, Et Ux

Posted on June 1, 2023 by admin

Case Information

07-2-01035-0 | STATE OF WA EMPLOYMENT SECURITY DEPT VS SHAWN W DAY, ET UX

Case Number
07-2-01035-0

Court
Lewis

File Date
08/20/2007

Case Type
Tax Warrants

Case Status
Completed/Re-Completed

Party

Taxpayer (Participant)
DAY, JANE DOE

Taxpayer (Participant)
DAY, SHAWN W

Plaintiff
STATE OF WASHINGTON EMPLOYMENT SECURITY DEPT

Disposition Events

08/20/2007 Judgment

Judgment Type
Tax Warrant

Monetary/Property Award

Creditors: STATE OF WASHINGTON EMPLOYMENT SECURITY DEPT

Debtors: DAY, JANE DOE, DAY, SHAWN W

Signed Date: 08/13/2007

Filed Date: 08/20/2007

Effective Date: 08/20/2007

Current Judgment Status:

Status: Vacated

Status Date: 11/09/2007

Comment: Judgments this case: 1 2007-08-20 WOBES WARRANT OVERPAID BENEFITS EMPLY SEC JUDGMENT IN FAVOR OF STATE OF WASHINGTON EMPLOYMENT SECURITY DEPT AND AGAINST SHAWN W DAY, 118 WALLACE RD, MOSSYROCK, WA 98564-9613 AND THE MARITAL COMMUNITY OF SHAWN W DAY IN THE AMOUNT OF 550.88. PLUS INTEREST @ 1% PER MONTH 2007-11-19 TWV TAX WARRANT VACATED

Events and Hearings

08/20/2007 Case Resolution Transfer of Judgment
08/20/2007 Filing Fee Vouchered Comment
FILING FEE VOUCHERED;
08/20/2007 Warrant for OverPaid Benefits Employment Security View Document WARRANT OVERPAID BENEFITS EMPLY SECComment
1: WARRANT OVERPAID BENEFITS EMPLY SEC;
11/19/2007 Tax Warrant Vacated View Document TAX WARRANT VACATEDComment
2: TAX WARRANT VACATED;

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

92-8-00097-1 | WA State v. Shawn Day

Posted on June 1, 2023 by admin

Case Information

92-8-00097-1 | STATE VS SHAWN DAY
Case Number
92-8-00097-1

Court
Lewis

File Date
05/01/1992

Case Type
JUV Juvenile Offender

Case Status
Completed/Re-Completed

Party

Plaintiff (Criminal)
STATE OF WASHINGTON, NFN

Active Attorneys

Lead Attorney

MEYN, JEN

Court Appointed

Divertee (WIP)
DAY, SHAWN W

Charge

Charges
DAY, SHAWN W

		Description	Statute	Level	Date
	1	No Charge Exist	No charge	Non Charge	05/01/1992

Events and Hearings

05/01/1992 Petition for Termination of Diversion Agreement Comment
PET FOR TERM OF DIVERSION AGREEMENT;
05/05/1992 Notice and Summons Comment
NOTICE AND SUMMONS -2; 05-20-1992JO; TERM DIV;
05/20/1992 Juvenile Offender Hearing Time
8:00 AMComment
TERM DIV
05/20/1992 Case Resolution Uncontested Resolution
05/20/1992 Motion and Affidavit Declaration Comment
MOT & AFF TO W/DRAW PET TO TERM DIV;

DOCUMENTS

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

24 most common logical fallacies

Posted on May 31, 2023 by admin

School of Thought did an amazing job describing some of the most common logical fallacies in plain English. Study them and improve your thinking.

Logical fallacies are mistakes and flaws in reasoning.

Whenever I’m reviewing a decision memo, strategy proposal, experiment report, an investment thesis, or some other document which might have significant impact on the firm’s performance, I’m checking if the argument makes sense logically.

In other words, I’m examining if the conclusion is supported by the statements and premises preceding it. Any disconnects are explored further.

Studying logical fallacies is a good way to improve your thinking and reasoning.

School of Thought did an amazing job describing some of the most common logical fallacies in plain English. You can study them on their interactive website, or below, reproduced on a single page.

If you’d like to become better at overcoming these fallacies I suggest the following guide:

Strawman

By exaggerating, misrepresenting, or just completely fabricating someone’s argument, it’s much easier to present your own position as being reasonable, but this kind of dishonesty serves to undermine honest rational debate.

Example: After Will said that we should put more money into health and education, Warren responded by saying that he was surprised that Will hates our country so much that he wants to leave it defenceless by cutting military spending.

False cause

Many people confuse correlation (things happening together or in sequence) for causation (that one thing actually causes the other to happen). Sometimes correlation is coincidental, or it may be attributable to a common cause.

Example: Pointing to a fancy chart, Roger shows how temperatures have been rising over the past few centuries, whilst at the same time the numbers of pirates have been decreasing; thus pirates cool the world and global warming is a hoax.

Appeal to emotion

Appeals to emotion include appeals to fear, envy, hatred, pity, pride, and more. It’s important to note that sometimes a logically coherent argument may inspire emotion or have an emotional aspect, but the problem and fallacy occurs when emotion is used instead of a logical argument, or to obscure the fact that no compelling rational reason exists for one’s position. Everyone, bar sociopaths, is affected by emotion, and so appeals to emotion are a very common and effective argument tactic, but they’re ultimately flawed, dishonest, and tend to make one’s opponents justifiably emotional.

Example: Luke didn’t want to eat his sheep’s brains with chopped liver and brussel sprouts, but his father told him to think about the poor, starving children in a third world country who weren’t fortunate enough to have any food at all.

The fallacy fallacy

It is entirely possible to make a claim that is false yet argue with logical coherency for that claim, just as it is possible to make a claim that is true and justify it with various fallacies and poor arguments.

Example: Recognising that Amanda had committed a fallacy in arguing that we should eat healthy food because a nutritionist said it was popular, Alyse said we should therefore eat bacon double cheeseburgers every day.

Slippery slope

The problem with this reasoning is that it avoids engaging with the issue at hand, and instead shifts attention to extreme hypotheticals. Because no proof is presented to show that such extreme hypotheticals will in fact occur, this fallacy has the form of an appeal to emotion fallacy by leveraging fear. In effect the argument at hand is unfairly tainted by unsubstantiated conjecture.

Example: Colin Closet asserts that if we allow same-sex couples to marry, then the next thing we know we’ll be allowing people to marry their parents, their cars and even monkeys.

Ad hominem

Ad hominem attacks can take the form of overtly attacking somebody, or more subtly casting doubt on their character or personal attributes as a way to discredit their argument. The result of an ad hom attack can be to undermine someone’s case without actually having to engage with it.

Example: After Sally presents an eloquent and compelling case for a more equitable taxation system, Sam asks the audience whether we should believe anything from a woman who isn’t married, was once arrested, and smells a bit weird.

Tu quoque

Pronounced too-kwo-kwee. Literally translating as ‘you too’ this fallacy is also known as the appeal to hypocrisy. It is commonly employed as an effective red herring because it takes the heat off someone having to defend their argument, and instead shifts the focus back on to the person making the criticism.

Example: Nicole identified that Hannah had committed a logical fallacy, but instead of addressing the substance of her claim, Hannah accused Nicole of committing a fallacy earlier on in the conversation.

Personal incredulity

Complex subjects like biological evolution through natural selection require some amount of understanding before one is able to make an informed judgement about the subject at hand; this fallacy is usually used in place of that understanding.

Example: Kirk drew a picture of a fish and a human and with effusive disdain asked Richard if he really thought we were stupid enough to believe that a fish somehow turned into a human through just, like, random things happening over time.

Special pleading

Humans are funny creatures and have a foolish aversion to being wrong. Rather than appreciate the benefits of being able to change one’s mind through better understanding, many will invent ways to cling to old beliefs. One of the most common ways that people do this is to post-rationalize a reason why what they thought to be true must remain to be true. It’s usually very easy to find a reason to believe something that suits us, and it requires integrity and genuine honesty with oneself to examine one’s own beliefs and motivations without falling into the trap of justifying our existing ways of seeing ourselves and the world around us.

Example: Edward Johns claimed to be psychic, but when his ‘abilities’ were tested under proper scientific conditions, they magically disappeared. Edward explained this saying that one had to have faith in his abilities for them to work.

Loaded question

Loaded question fallacies are particularly effective at derailing rational debates because of their inflammatory nature – the recipient of the loaded question is compelled to defend themselves and may appear flustered or on the back foot.

Example: Grace and Helen were both romantically interested in Brad. One day, with Brad sitting within earshot, Grace asked in an inquisitive tone whether Helen was still having problems with her drug habit.

Burden of proof

The burden of proof lies with someone who is making a claim, and is not upon anyone else to disprove. The inability, or disinclination, to disprove a claim does not render that claim valid, nor give it any credence whatsoever. However it is important to note that we can never be certain of anything, and so we must assign value to any claim based on the available evidence, and to dismiss something on the basis that it hasn’t been proven beyond all doubt is also fallacious reasoning.

Example: Bertrand declares that a teapot is, at this very moment, in orbit around the Sun between the Earth and Mars, and that because no one canprove him wrong, his claim is therefore a valid one.

AMBIGUITY

Politicians are often guilty of using ambiguity to mislead and will later point to how they were technically not outright lying if they come under scrutiny. The reason that it qualifies as a fallacy is that it is intrinsically misleading.

Example: When the judge asked the defendant why he hadn’t paid his parking fines, he said that he shouldn’t have to pay them because the sign said ‘Fine for parking here’ and so he naturally presumed that it would be fine to park there.

The gambler’s fallacy

This commonly believed fallacy can be said to have helped create an entire city in the desert of Nevada USA. Though the overall odds of a ‘big run’ happening may be low, each spin of the wheel is itself entirely independent from the last. So whilst there may be a very small chance that heads will come up 20 times in a row if you flip a coin, the chances of heads coming up on each individual flip remain 50/50, and aren’t influenced by what happened before.

Example: Red had come up six times in a row on the roulette wheel, so Greg knew that it was close to certain that black would be next up. Suffering an economic form of natural selection with this thinking, he soon lost all of his savings.

Bandwagon

The flaw in this argument is that the popularity of an idea has absolutely no bearing on its validity. If it did, then the Earth would have made itself flat for most of history to accommodate this popular belief.

Example: Shamus pointed a drunken finger at Sean and asked him to explain how so many people could believe in leprechauns if they’re only a silly old superstition. Sean, however, had had a few too many Guinness himself and fell off his chair.

Appeal to authority

It’s important to note that this fallacy should not be used to dismiss the claims of experts, or scientific consensus. Appeals to authority are not valid arguments, but nor is it reasonable to disregard the claims of experts who have a demonstrated depth of knowledge unless one has a similar level of understanding and/or access to empirical evidence. However, it is entirely possible that the opinion of a person or institution of authority is wrong; therefore the authority that such a person or institution holds does not have any intrinsic bearing upon whether their claims are true or not.

Example: Not able to defend his position that evolution ‘isn’t true’ Bob says that he knows a scientist who also questions evolution (and presumably isn’t a primate).

Composition/division

Often when something is true for the part it does also apply to the whole, or vice versa, but the crucial difference is whether there exists good evidence to show that this is the case. Because we observe consistencies in things, our thinking can become biased so that we presume consistency to exist where it does not.

Example: Daniel was a precocious child and had a liking for logic. He reasoned that atoms are invisible, and that he was made of atoms and therefore invisible too. Unfortunately, despite his thinking skills, he lost the game of hide and go seek.

No true Scotsman

In this form of faulty reasoning one’s belief is rendered unfalsifiable because no matter how compelling the evidence is, one simply shifts the goalposts so that it wouldn’t apply to a supposedly ‘true’ example. This kind of post-rationalization is a way of avoiding valid criticisms of one’s argument.

Example: Angus declares that Scotsmen do not put sugar on their porridge, to which Lachlan points out that he is a Scotsman and puts sugar on his porridge. Furious, like a true Scot, Angus yells that no true Scotsman sugars his porridge.

Genetic

This fallacy avoids the argument by shifting focus onto something’s or someone’s origins. It’s similar to an ad hominem fallacy in that it leverages existing negative perceptions to make someone’s argument look bad, without actually presenting a case for why the argument itself lacks merit.

Example: Accused on the 6 o’clock news of corruption and taking bribes, the senator said that we should all be very wary of the things we hear in the media, because we all know how very unreliable the media can be.

Black-or-white

Also known as the false dilemma, this insidious tactic has the appearance of forming a logical argument, but under closer scrutiny it becomes evident that there are more possibilities than the either/or choice that is presented. Binary, black-or-white thinking doesn’t allow for the many different variables, conditions, and contexts in which there would exist more than just the two possibilities put forth. It frames the argument misleadingly and obscures rational, honest debate.

Example: Whilst rallying support for his plan to fundamentally undermine citizens’ rights, the Supreme Leader told the people they were either on his side, or they were on the side of the enemy.

Begging the question

This logically incoherent argument often arises in situations where people have an assumption that is very ingrained, and therefore taken in their minds as a given. Circular reasoning is bad mostly because it’s not very good.

Example: The word of Zorbo the Great is flawless and perfect. We know this because it says so in The Great and Infallible Book of Zorbo’s Best and Most Truest Things that are Definitely True and Should Not Ever Be Questioned.

Appeal to nature

Many ‘natural’ things are also considered ‘good’, and this can bias our thinking; but naturalness itself doesn’t make something good or bad. For instance murder could be seen as very natural, but that doesn’t mean it’s good or justifiable.

Example: The medicine man rolled into town on his bandwagon offering various natural remedies, such as very special plain water. He said that it was only natural that people should be wary of ‘artificial’ medicines such as antibiotics.

Anecdotal

It’s often much easier for people to believe someone’s testimony as opposed to understanding complex data and variation across a continuum. Quantitative scientific measures are almost always more accurate than personal perceptions and experiences, but our inclination is to believe that which is tangible to us, and/or the word of someone we trust over a more ‘abstract’ statistical reality.

Example: Jason said that that was all cool and everything, but his grandfather smoked, like, 30 cigarettes a day and lived until 97 – so don’t believe everything you read about meta analyses of methodologically sound studies showing proven causal relationships.

The Texas sharpshooter

This ‘false cause’ fallacy is coined after a marksman shooting randomly at barns and then painting bullseye targets around the spot where the most bullet holes appear, making it appear as if he’s a really good shot. Clusters naturally appear by chance, but don’t necessarily indicate that there is a causal relationship.

Example: The makers of Sugarette Candy Drinks point to research showing that of the five countries where Sugarette drinks sell the most units, three of them are in the top ten healthiest countries on Earth, therefore Sugarette drinks are healthy.

Middle ground

Much of the time the truth does indeed lie between two extreme points, but this can bias our thinking: sometimes a thing is simply untrue and a compromise of it is also untrue. Half way between truth and a lie, is still a lie.

Example: Holly said that vaccinations caused autism in children, but her scientifically well-read friend Caleb said that this claim had been debunked and proven false. Their friend Alice offered a compromise that vaccinations must cause some autism, just not all autism.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

The 13 Archimedian Solids

Posted on May 13, 2023 by admin

The Archimedean Solids cousins to the Platonic Solids as all of them are composed of regular polygons meeting in identical vertices with the Platonic Solid’s faces being composed of only one type of polygon…

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Case Information

Party

Events and Hearings

Contents

7 Free legal search engines and databases

1. Fastcase: For an online law library

You may like these posts

2. CourtListener: For legal opinions

3. Caselaw Access Project: For book-published case law

4. FindLaw: For searchable Supreme Court decisions

5. Legal Information Institute: For US law online and a legal encyclopedia

6. Casetext and ROSS: For AI assistance

7. Justia: For the latest summaries sent straight to you

Beyond legal databases: Other free research resources

1. Primary sources: For going straight to the source

2. Legal blogs: For keeping up-to-date

3. Google Scholar: For searching legal journals and published opinions

Conclusion

How can I do legal research for free?

What software is used for legal research?

Freed in Death from a “Nightmare Like No Other”

NOT GOING OUT QUIETLY

CATHERINE’S STORY

WHAT’S MONEY GOT TO DO WITH IT?

UNBEARABLE PAIN

REMEMBERING MOTHERS

Case Information

Party

Disposition Events

Events and Hearings

Case Information

Party

Charge

Events and Hearings

Strawman

False cause

Appeal to emotion

The fallacy fallacy

Slippery slope

Ad hominem

Tu quoque

Personal incredulity

Special pleading

Loaded question

Burden of proof

The gambler’s fallacy

Bandwagon

Appeal to authority

Composition/division

No true Scotsman

Genetic

Black-or-white

Begging the question

Appeal to nature

Anecdotal

The Texas sharpshooter

Middle ground

Pages

Recent Posts

Recent Comments

Archives

Categories

Artist/Musicians/Dancers/etc

Blogroll

Business Resources

Festivals/Faires/Events

Forms

Law Resources

Local Business

Medical Resources

Music Resources

PC 1st Aid

Points & Authorities

Private Sector

Public Sector

Video Resources

Meta