Document: AFFIDAVIT OF DEFENDANT RESPONDENT
Link: [Open PDF](https://42o.org/l3g4l/271.0 AFFIDAVIT OF DEFENDANT RESPONDENT 2019-05-10 .pdf)
Filing Date: 2019-05-10
Summary (Justice Demanded)
Upon review of the court document titled “Affidavit of Defendant Respondent,” Aaron Surina has raised several concerns over perceived injustices, unethical conduct, and potential judicial bias.
Surina has identified instances where the language used in the contempt hearing and restraining order seems misleading, particularly concerning the sale of his property and insurance-related issues. He argues that he was not adequately informed about contingencies related to the sale of his property, and there has been a lack of transparency and collaboration in property decisions, which contradicts agreements made at the courthouse.
He has also alleged unethical conduct by Stanley Kempner and Keith Glanzer, accusing Mr. Glanzer of attempting trickery via email and implicating him in insurance fraud. Surina is pleading with the court to acknowledge that he has not willfully disobeyed any court orders and asserts that the counterparty’s removal of the house from the market was a contemptuous act that undermines his financial stability.
Furthermore, Surina has raised concerns about the insurance claim process managed by Homesite, indicating a potential bias favoring the insurance company over policyholders. Surina has emphasized that the system places an unwarranted burden on policyholders who are already dealing with a loss, which, in his case, adds to his financial burden.
In addition, Surina has noted potential areas of concern in his insurance policy, which may limit his claim benefits and delay claim processing. He believes these conditions could be viewed as unfair if not clearly communicated upfront.
Surina also alleges that his property was wrongfully classified as community property, asserting this action was a deliberate attempt to impose unlawful debt on him. He further claims that this misclassification facilitated fraudulent actions, including the concealment of deeds of trust, and caused an unjust loss in his property’s value.
Moreover, Surina has drawn attention to the transfer of marital property rights from his wife, Sirinya Surina, to Bradley J. Barker and Stacie L. Barker. This transfer occurred without Surina’s apparent agreement or benefit, suggesting a lack of consideration for his rights.
Surina believes certain stipulations such as liabilities for assessments by the City of Spokane Valley, agreement for installation, maintenance and repair of water line, restrictions in the plat, sewer maintenance agreement, and covenants, conditions, restrictions, easements or reservations impose undue burdens on him.
He has also expressed concerns over charges of human trafficking, including the assumption of guilt without establishing mens rea, and the imposition of a hefty fee even without a proven guilt, which he views as highly punitive and prejudiced.
In summary, Aaron Surina alleges that he has been subjected to numerous injustices, unethical conduct by attorneys, and potential judicial bias, adversely affecting his rights and interests.
About The Author
