Document: DECLARATION AFFIDAVIT
Link: [Open PDF](https://42o.org/l3g4l/291.0 DECLARATION AFFIDAVIT 2019-06-12 .pdf)
Filing Date: 2019-06-12
Summary (Justice Demanded)
After reviewing multiple summaries of a large document pertaining to the case of Aaron Surina, a pattern of potential injustices, biases, and unethical conduct is apparent. Aaron Surina, the respondent, is facing numerous obstacles posed by the legal system and the conduct of attorneys, especially Stanley Kempner, Keith Glanzer, and those representing Sirinya Surina, Carl Wilson, or Keith Glanzer.
Notably, Aaron Surina alleges that Mr. Glanzer has refused to formalize agreements concerning international travel, an essential aspect of child custody cases involving dual citizenship. This refusal has created unnecessary conflict and has seemingly exacerbated the legal fees, unjustly burdening the petitioner financially. Furthermore, Aaron Surina has raised concerns about Mr. Glanzer’s disregard for civil procedure rules and local timelines, which infringes on his rights and could indicate judicial bias.
The conduct of Mr. Glanzer has also been called into question due to allegations of unethical behavior, including exploiting conflict to bill for additional services and accusations of domestic violence against Aaron Surina. These allegations appear to be an attempt to distract from the petitioner’s involvement in domestic violence incidents. Furthermore, Aaron Surina has accused Mr. Glanzer of pushing his client into financial hardship through intimidation and conflict, which is indicative of unethical conduct.
Aaron Surina’s relationship with his son, David, is also being detrimentally impacted. His son has reportedly been told that he is not allowed to communicate with his father, an act that not only infringes upon Aaron’s rights as a father but also potentially harms his son’s emotional well-being. Attempts at mediation have been thwarted, and the interference from the opposing counsel has frustrated all efforts, denoting bias and unfairness.
The documents also suggest that Aaron Surina is being subjected to restrictions and conditions in retrieving his personal belongings and spending time with his children. These restrictions seem to reflect an environment of control and suspicion towards him, infringing upon his rights as a father and painting an unfavorable picture of his character. The withholding of critical personal documents such as passports and immigration documents, as well as the imposition of a restraining order without addressing potential biases, further compound the perceived injustices against him.
The court documents appear to limit Aaron Surina’s financial and parental rights. He is being prevented from accessing funds beyond a certain amount without mutual agreement, potentially limiting his ability to secure legal representation. Additionally, he is restrained from changing the primary residence of his children without a further court order, which could limit his rights as a parent.
Furthermore, the documents display instances of potential judicial misconduct and indicate a misuse of the legal system to exert control and inflict financial hardship on Aaron. He is unjustly prevented from communicating with his sons for seven days and threatened with future trials for allegedly violating a contested court order.
Aaron Surina’s efforts to protect his children from potential abduction are also being thwarted. Despite having legal custody and enrolling his children in the Child Passport Issuance Alert Program (CPIAP), the system does not guarantee that his children will not be issued new or renewed passports without his consent. The lack of oversight on travelers leaving the U.S. and the potential loophole of dual nationality further complicate his efforts to protect his children.
In summary, the court documents reveal a pattern of potential injustices, biases, and unethical conduct against Aaron Surina, who is seemingly systematically denied his rights as a father and faces an uphill battle due to a system that does not prioritize the rights of a custodial parent. The conduct of attorneys, especially Mr. Glanzer, and the apparent bias in the legal system are exacerbating the situation, resulting in what appears to be a systemic injustice against Aaron Surina.
About The Author
