Document: ORDER ON CONTEMPT
Link: [Open PDF](https://42o.org/l3g4l/195.0 ORDER ON CONTEMPT 2018-06-13 .pdf)
Filing Date: 2018-06-13
Summary (Justice Demanded)
Document title: ORDER ON CONTEMPT
In the documents obtained from the Superior Court of Washington, County of Spokane, there is an apparent display of unfair judgement and potential bias against Aaron Michael Surina in a contempt hearing. The court finds Mr. Surina in contempt and penalizes him with a civil penalty payable to the Spokane County Clerk, and lawyer fees and costs payable to Keith A. Glanzer. However, the document lacks transparency, as it does not provide the amount of these costs or a thorough explanation for the charges.
The documents conclude that Mr. Surina intentionally failed to obey a court order without elaborating on the nature of this disobedience or providing any supporting evidence. This lack of clarity raises questions about the fairness of the proceedings and the potential for bias against Mr. Surina.
Moreover, the court’s decision to deem the lawyer fees and costs as “reasonable” without a detailed breakdown and justification of these costs may suggest a potential misuse of the court’s discretion and a disregard for Mr. Surina’s financial circumstances.
The document also issues Mr. Surina with a civil penalty for violation of a parenting/custody order, but does not provide any specifics about what violation occurred or whether the penalty is proportionate, thus denying him his right to be fully informed of the charges against him.
Further, the document mentions a money judgment without specifying the debtor or creditor’s name, the amount, or the interest. This lack of information may suggest a breach of due process, as it hinders Mr. Surina’s ability to understand or challenge the financial obligations imposed upon him.
The document’s overall lack of transparency, potential misuse of discretion, and failure to uphold due process, coupled with its poor quality that may prevent Aaron from fully comprehending the implications, appear to reflect a biased and potentially unethical conduct against Aaron Surina. This raises several questions about the fairness of the proceedings and the potential for bias against him.
If Mr. Surina feels that he has not received a fair hearing, he is advised to seek professional legal counsel to help him interpret these documents and possibly challenge the court’s decision.
About The Author
