Document: MOTION FOR ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE
Link: [Open PDF](https://42o.org/l3g4l/432.0 MOTION FOR ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE 2020-11-24 .pdf)
Filing Date: 2020-11-24
Summary (Justice Demanded)
Document title: MOTION FOR ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE
The court documents suggest Aaron Surina, the respondent, is being subjected to seemingly biased and potentially unfair legal proceedings. The documents raise concerns about the vague and poorly substantiated accusations that Sirinya Svyrina, the petitioner, levies against him.
The accusations revolve around Aaron allegedly violating several court orders. However, the documents lack specific evidence, dates, and amounts, making it difficult for Aaron to defend himself effectively. This lack of detail is apparent in the charges of non-compliance with child support orders and accusations of showing up at the petitioner’s house on non-exchange days. Similarly, the claims that Aaron did not promptly return his children to their mother lack clarity and context. These vague accusations appear to unfairly depict Aaron negatively without providing him a fair opportunity to refute them.
The documents further reflect a potential bias against Aaron through the severe sanctions requested in the motion for contempt hearing. The demand for hefty fines, meeting unspecified conditions, payment of the petitioner’s legal fees and costs, and threats of imprisonment seem excessively punitive for alleged violations of parenting time orders.
Aaron also seems to bear an unfair financial burden. Despite a hefty monthly child support payment of $1,550.78 and a payment history showing disbursements exceeding this amount, the documents still indicate he owes $386.79. Furthermore, the documents list multiple payments totaling $11,244.07 without providing a clear breakdown or justification for these costs. This opacity raises questions about the transparency and fairness of the financial aspects of this case.
The court documents also hint at a potential breach of privacy. They warn that unless sealed, filed documents are publicly available, potentially exposing Aaron’s sensitive information.
Finally, the documents include a series of text messages or notes that imply negative actions on Aaron’s part without providing context or allowing him to explain. This lack of clarity further suggests potential bias and unethical conduct in this case.
In conclusion, the court documents suggest a potentially biased and unfair treatment of Aaron Surina. The vague and unsubstantiated accusations, severe sanctions, unexplained financial discrepancies, and potential breaches of privacy all seem to reflect possible unethical conduct and bias favoring the petitioner.
About The Author
