Document: PROPOSED ORDER FINDINGS
Link: [Open PDF](https://42o.org/l3g4l/556.0 PROPOSED ORDER FINDINGS 2023-10-12 .pdf)
Filing Date: 2023-10-12
Summary (Justice Demanded)
In the analyzed court document, the Superior Court of Washington, County of Spokane, found Aaron Surina, the father, in contempt for alleged non-compliance with support and custody orders. This document raises concerns about potential bias and unfairness towards Mr. Surina. The court found that Mr. Surina intentionally failed to follow the orders, including child support and medical support, without clear evidence or explanation. The document lacks clarity in establishing Mr. Surina’s intent or his financial ability to comply, suggesting potential bias against him.
The document also hints at a biased handling of Mr. Surina’s custody order, penalizing him without proper substantiation and overlooking his past adherence to orders. There are indications that Mr. Surina was not given a fair chance to present his side of the story. The document does not clearly specify the reasons for the alleged violations or the justification for imposing lawyer’s fees, raising questions about the fairness of these proceedings.
The document further discusses interest rates on child support, medical support, and children’s expenses, set at a potentially high and unfair 12%, adding to Mr. Surina’s financial burden. The language and structure of the document are unclear, which could be perceived as an injustice, making it difficult for Mr. Surina to fully understand his rights and obligations.
Moreover, the document mentions penalties for violations of the custody order without clarifying whether Mr. Surina violated any provisions, potentially leading to unjust penalties. It also provides for make-up parenting time and jail time, but does not specify to whom these conditions apply. If these conditions are imposed on Mr. Surina without a fair assessment, it would constitute an injustice.
Lastly, the document mentions a court review but does not provide a specific date or time, potentially aiming to keep Mr. Surina uninformed and unprepared – a clear indication of judicial bias.
In light of these points, the document suggests potential bias, unfairness, and possible unethical conduct against Mr. Surina. The lack of clarity, high interest rates, potential unwarranted penalties, and lack of transparency about court proceedings may be viewed as an instance of injustice towards Mr. Surina.
About The Author
