Attorney Withdrawal Impact Case

Can I have some questions about when an attorney with drawls from representing the respondent who is the non-custodial parent and an ongoing child support case in Chicago Illinois cook county first district this case is for child support payments and full coverage of educational expenses correspondence attorney filed a motion to withdraw on August *, * where she sat to present her withdrawal motion to the judge on August *, * now my question about this is that we had a pre-trial that was held on June *, * and the pre-trial was continued for August *, * where the respondents attorney was ordered by the judge to calculate the respondents recently discovered $*,*.* into his income and calculated into child support payments which his attorney was supposed to send that proposal of that *,* to the judge on August *, * but she instead filed a motion to withdraw which now instead of our continued pre-trial for August * it will be for the attorney to withdraw from the respondents case

Yes

But here is the situation throughout this case the respondent through his attorney have deliberately delayed the proceedings to the point that the judge has been making all her rulings and decisions throughout this case literally based on false statements made verbally or written on motions and submitted to the court by the respondents attorney despite me providing overwhelming documented evidence such as the respondents bank statements other financial discovery disclosures that were provided to my previous attorney and to his attorney that don’t match up direct evidence of the respondents income cycling diversion and concealment now I have discovered a second hidden account where the non-custodial parents attorney falsely stated to the judge that it is a credit card account and the respondent is only a authorize user but that is not the case his attorney also deliberately misrepresented what the judge stated at our previous pre-trial where it gave the respondent an excuse to evade his responsibility from having to provide or submit applications to the parent plus loans for our boys college tuition and all these tactics have now caused * missed tuition payments Throughout this case it’s been clear and obvious that the judge has been making her rulings and decisions based on the false statements made verbally by the respondent and his attorney to the point where the judge joined them and making excuses and attempting to justify the income cycling diversion and concealment weight

It got to the point where this judge joined the respondent and his attorney and attempted to justify the respondents direct proof and his bank statements income cycling diversion and concealment I even provided documented evidence that directly prove the respondent is receiving under the table income which is Hayden and a different account the respondent was never ordered by The judge to contribute to college expenses or to fully cover college expenses or to cover books supplies clothing or anything that was in my petition for a full coverage of educational expenses for our twin boys I provided overwhelming documented evidence with my motion for clarification that was supposed to clarify what the judge actually stayed it on June * which was deliberately misrepresented and the respondent attorneys order she drafted as I discovered a second hidden account after that pre-trial and the respondent attorney filed motion to quash my subpoenas a properly obtained properly served as she falsely claimed to the judge that the Bank of America records is a credit card account where the respondent is only an authorized user after receiving a notice from the bank it is actually a hidden checking and savings account it is not a credit card account but the judge has not locked or read my motion for clarification or evidence my objections to the opposing parties motions to quash my subpoenas as on July *, * where it was only my motion for clarification and my motion to disclose misrepresentation and misconduct and my motion to strike the opposing parties motions to quash my subpoenas were set to be presented as the opposing parties motions to quash my subpoenas were initially said to be presented on August * where the respondents attorney deliberately moved them up to be presented at the same time as my motions on July * after July * I noticed that the respondents attorney once again was attempting to deliberately miss represent what was clarified and also falsely stated in her draft a quarter order that by Illinois law high as the self representing petitioner is supposed to provide proper notice to the respondent for her before submitting subpoenas which is in accurate that is the Banks job to provide notice to the respondent it was also written in the order drafted by the attorney that knows if I do subpoena the bank records from Bank of America they are only to be subpoenaed with caution and directed to the court meaning the judge only watches in direct violation of Illinois statue laws and Supreme Court rules where I have the right to see those bank records as this case pertains directly to child support payments and educational expenses and it’s a civil case so I also drafted a court order and send it to the judge the judge did not sign my “order that I drafted that clearly stated what was clarified and what was to be followed she signed the respondent attorneys order which was not clearly stating what was clarified and had all these false statements that I’ve mentioned and it’s a bit concerning as the attorney also stated via email to the judge that the respondent cannot submit Applications to the parent plus loans for reasons that he cannot open a fafsa A couch where I immediately replied to the attorney and to the judge that the email I received from the University‘s financial aid office directly contradicts the false statement made by the attorney which stated in the email that the financial aid office did in fact tell the respondent that he can open his own account and submit applications to the parent plus loan Which again proves that the judge is in fact making rulings and decisions based on false statements by the opposing party and his attorney

Oh it also proved that the judge is not reading any motions that were filed or looking at any evidence attached to those motions meaning the email from the University was actually attached to my motion for clarification since the judge believed the respondents attorney as she falsely stated what I have mentioned and I having to submit the email again clearly proves evidence that were provided with my motion for clarification was not even looked at

I have filed a motion for reconsideration and every other motion provided overwhelming document or abundance and when I say overwhelming documented evidence I mean the respondents bank statements emails other documents they were all either not looked at or just disregarded it’s been clear as day that all the judges rulings and decisions are an were based on false verbal statements by the opposing party or false statements deliberately written in there frivolous motions not one time did this judge make a ruling in the best interest of my childrens welfare or educational expenses actually this judge has helped the opposing party evade the responsibility of having to pay what he should have been paying child support is judge did not set retroactive child support she reserved it again she helped the respondent evade that responsibility also also helped the respondent evade his responsibility from having to cover college expenses and actually cost for monthly tuition payments she also stated that my twin sons will have to work and pay for their own tuition or attend community college with all that evidence provided to her which she did not look at or just disregard Based on the response Anthony’s attorney falsely claiming things that my documented evidence provided directly contradicted it doesn’t add up and it doesn’t make sense

I don’t see an appeal doing anything as that will take even more time and it will be for nothing it’s concerning that a child support judge who is supposed to be prioritizing the children’s well fair and educational expenses has not done that none of her rulings and decisions in this case have been based on the children’s well-being or educational expenses despite having provided overwhelming documented evidence that the respondent is hiding income even with the second discovery of a hidden bank account

Yea

So my question is actually is a child support judge supposed to be making verbal statements such as that the boys will have to work to pay for their own tuition or attend community college and shrugging her shoulders is a child support judge supposed to be verbally attempting to justify the direct evidence of the respondents income cycling diversion and concealment

But how is she prioritizing my children when the respondent was not ordered to cover college expenses not even books and supplies was not ordered to pay the actual child support he was supposed to be paid and not ordered to pay retroactive child support at all all her decisions are based on false statements by the opposing party while I’m here providing document after document it doesn’t add up something is not right here

So if I file a complaint against the judge for all the reasons I have stated motions are not being read evidence is not being looked at or just disregarded or overlooked and for the judges statements that my boys will need to work to cover their own tuition or attend community college the judge attempting to justify the respondents income cycling diversion and concealment of money all the court orders that I have show the respondent and his attorneys frivolous motions were granted and mine were being denied or stricken now how is that prioritizing the children and their educational expenses or their welfare expenses it is not and as a child support judge what will the board say to the judge

I don’t need an attorney to represent my case effectively I believe I can do that myself by providing my filings with the scorch my evidence that was submitted to the court the orders that were drafted by the respondents attorney with the judges rulings and all of it will Directly proves none of the decisions and rulings were or are prioritizing the children’s welfare or educational expenses not one ruling was based on the children

Yes

The entire situation and behavior and actions by The judge has actually helped the opposing party further inflict financial hardship on my children and helped the opposing party deprive my boys of a college education

Yes

I did do that after I discovered The respondent second hidden bank account with his hidden income which again did not My children

Yes

But that’s what I’m trying to explain also I did file a motion to modify the child support and to set retroactive child support as discharged did not set it she reserved it I also provided evidence that there was a second account discovered but because of the opposing parties attorney falsely stating that it is a credit card account and the respondent is only an authorized user the judge believed that false statement and as it states in the court order I received yesterday July * at the judge signed the respondent misleading court order that I am to submit resubmit a subpoena to Bank of America but those bank records cannot come to me they need to go to the court which is in violation of my rights of submitting a subpoena that was properly obtained and served

The judge had a choice to either sign my drafted court order or the respondents attorneys drafted court order she chose the respondents attorneys quote order what does misleading statements in it so now in my opinion it is direct proof again that the judge is making her Rawlings and decisions based on false statements by the opposing party

I’m asking if I file a complaint and this judge gets questioned or investigated as the evidence will clearly prove her rulings are based on false statements by the opposing party will she be told that she is supposed to be prioritizing the children’s welfare and educational expenses and to look at actual evidence and make her decisions based on evidence

What type of actions may be taken to correct it