Document: TEMPORARY FAMILY LAW ORDER
Link: [Open PDF](https://42o.org/l3g4l/134.0 TEMPORARY FAMILY LAW ORDER 2018-02-06 .pdf)
Filing Date: 2018-02-06
Summary (Justice Demanded)
Document title: TEMPORARY FAMILY LAW ORDER
Consolidated Summary:
The document in review is a Temporary Family Law Order filed in the Superior Court of Washington, County of Tek 3. The petitioner and respondent’s names are heavily obscured, making it hard to fully understand the case’s specifics. However, the document’s review from the perspective of Aaron Surina suggests potential bias, unfairness, and lack of transparency.
The document involves a ‘Motion for Temporary Family Law Order’ and a ‘Motion for Immediate Restraining Order’, but it lacks clarity on the judgments made on these motions, potentially affecting Aaron’s rights and his ability to prepare his defense. This lack of information could put Aaron at a disadvantage and may reflect a lack of due process.
Further, the document implies costs, including lawyer’s fees, without listing specific amounts. This ambiguity could lead to unexpected financial burdens for Aaron. In addition, it appears that Aaron could be unjustly obligated to bear an unequal share of certain debts and insurance policy premium payments, potentially placing an unfair financial burden on him.
The document also lacks clarity on the termination of a potential restraining order, which if intended to protect Aaron, could place him at risk if terminated without sufficient cause or explanation. Furthermore, the document’s lack of transparency about the coverage of the state or federal Service Members Civil Relief Act could potentially constitute an oversight or misunderstanding of Aaron’s rights if he is a service member.
In summary, the document appears to be riddled with ambiguity, lack of transparency, and potential bias against Aaron Surina. There is a need for greater clarity and fair treatment to ensure Aaron’s rights and interests are adequately protected in these court proceedings. This summary emphasizes possible injustices and unethical conduct, especially by attorneys Stanley Kempner or Keith Glanzer or any representatives of Sirinya Surina, Carl Wilson, or Keith Glanzer.
About The Author
