Attorney Withdrawal Motion Timing

But when I asked you the same question yesterday you told me that. since the attorney filed her motion to withdraw. on August *. * and I file a petition against the respondent on August *. * that the attorney at that point does not need to act on behalf of the respondent since she has already filed her motion to withdraw. She is not representing him any longer.

So the attorney's motion to withdraw is set to be. heard before the judge by a zoom on August *. * at *:* AM As well as my petition. So let's say since. the attorney filed her motion to withdraw on August *. *. and I filed my petition on August *. *. and both motion and petition are set to be heard before the judge on August 12th. * at *:* AM and let's say that it is August * * At this point. there's no use for the attorney to. file anything against my petition on behalf. of the respondent, as her motion will be granted on the next morning.

But that would just be seen as a tactic to prolong the case as. she is granted withdrawal on August * at *:* AM. and if she files something on August * * against my petition How does that work? How is that fair if she will not be representing the respondent any longer and she files something a day before being granted withdrawal?

So let's say for example, she does file something against my partition on August * *. *. and she gets granted her withdrawal on August *. * at *:* AM to which point then the respondent has 21 days to either file his appearance to represent himself or hire an attorney. So what she filed on August * * against my partition really should not even be considered by the judge at that point

So I'm asking and want to know Once the respondents attorney is granted to withdraw. how do i get all her emotion? or partitions her? Any of her filings? that were filed? prior to her withdrawal Stricken or dismissed?

I also have a question. is it considered odd or would it be seen as odd? or unusual? unusual or troubling or concerning? if in a child support case pertaining to child support payments retroactive child support and full coverage of educational expenses in evolving three children? and the judge on the case continuously disregards documented evidence or just doesn't even look at any of it and clearly makes all her rulings and decisions literally based on false verbal statements Made by the respondent and his attorney. Is that troubling? Should I be concerned?

Evidence was presented correctly properly in order. factual documented evidence. but her rulings and decisions orders are not made on the factual evidence. For example, on August * * via email the respondents attorney stated to the judge that the respondent is unable to open his own fafsa Accounts. and submit applications to the parent plus loan for our twin sons. Now that was just a statement via email. Direct me to the judge from the respondents attorney. and the judge made her ruling based on that. Her decision but A piece of actual documented evidence in email. received from the university financial aid office clearly. stating that the respondent had called and he was told that he can open his own account and submit applications to the parent plus loan Now this email was attached to my motion for clarification that was filed on July * * courtesy copies sent directly to the court on July * * and Set and present it to the judge on. July *. * But yet on August * *. Via email. That false statement directly to the judge via email from. the respondents attorney. that was believed and the judge made her decision and ruling based on that statement. To which I immediately responded. What a copy of the email received from Concordia University. Financial aid office. That was received on July * * which directly contradicted. the attorneys false statement I did not hear nothing. Neither the attorney nor the judge replied. that also told me that the judge either did not look at the evidence as it was attached to my motion for clarification. Or she did look at it and just decided to disregard it.

I just wanna know. how is that situation seen? How do you describe that? How could it be seen?

Well, if that evidence was attached to my motion for clarification, filed. on July 6th * courtesy copies of my motion and evidence. provided via email directly to the court on July 19th. * Presented to the judge on July *. * via zoom. But then, on August * *. * via email. The judge made her decision based on that false statement by. the attorney What did that mean? I mean, how would somebody else get that evidence? was not looked at or not considered or just disregarded as the email directly contradicted the attorney's statement. I mean, that should make the judge feel stupid. or tell the judge that she got caught that she is making decisions based on false information. as that single documented evidence would've had told. the judge. that the attorney is lying. But since she believed it, she never looked at the evidence. which is concerning

I see it this way, as I have more than. Enough evidence. that the judge has literally been making all her decisions and rulings based on false statements. which is all documented and also the court orders also prove that none of her rulings or decisions are on behalf of the children or And the children's best interest not a single one. All her rulings and decisions seem to. be on the opposing parties side. which is concerning because it's a child support case pertaining to child support payments retroactive child support payments and full coverage of educational expenses with three children involved in this case. and on August * * When the attorney made that false statement and the judge made. her decision immediately based on that one false statement by the attorney, which was contradicted immediately with the email from the university. And I did not hear anything back from the attorney or from the judge. And the attorney filed her motion to withdraw from representing the respondent * */* hours after that situation. I believe that the judge also. Understood at that point. That there is direct evidence that all her rulings and decisions are based on false information. And the judge should also be concerned, I believe, in my opinion, because I did tell. well, I did state that it's concerning. that all her decisions and rulings are based on false information. And she is actually hurting my children's welfare and educational future. I did not hear anything back from this judge.

I also think it is extremely inappropriate. and unusual and concerning if a child support judge makes statements That everybody struggles while shrugging her shoulders. stating she stated it multiple times that might. twin sons will need to work. and pay for their own monthly college tuitions or attend Community College. while justifying the respondents Income cycling diversion and concealment. that was directly visible in the respondents bank statements that I provided Really indicates that there is a problem here with this. judge, all her decisions and rulings have actually inflicted further. hardship financially on the children and Have caused Five mist college tuition payments.

This is not a matter of me believing. This is factual reality. I have witnessed it. I have observed it. I have documented it.