Document: ORDER SHORTENING TIME
Link: [Open PDF] ( https://42o.org/l3g4l//115.0 ORDER SHORTENING TIME 2018-01-19 .pdf )
Filing Date: 2018-01-19
Summary:
From the father’s perspective, this document reflects unethical conduct and judicial bias in several ways. Firstly, the order appears to have been issued without proper consideration or review of the father’s side of the case. The motion for a contempt hearing was filed by the petitioner’s attorney, Keith A. Glanzer, without any input or response from the respondent, Aaron Michael Surina. This unilateral decision-making process shows a lack of impartiality and fairness in the court proceedings.
Furthermore, the order shortening time for the contempt hearing to be held on January 23, 2018, gives the respondent very little time to prepare or present his case adequately. This rushed timeline could be seen as an attempt to limit the respondent’s ability to defend himself effectively, further highlighting the biased nature of the court’s actions.
Additionally, the document indicates that the respondent is self-represented, while the petitioner has legal representation. This power imbalance can also contribute to an unfair advantage for the petitioner and suggests a lack of consideration for the respondent’s rights and ability to navigate the legal process.
Overall, the order reflects a lack of due process, impartiality, and fairness towards the respondent, Aaron Surina. The court’s actions seem to favor the petitioner and her attorney, Keith A. Glanzer, while disregarding the respondent’s rights and the principles of justice.
About The Author
