Document: REQUEST
Link: [Open PDF](https://42o.org/l3g4l/570.0 REQUEST 2024-03-01 .pdf)
Filing Date: 2024-03-01
Summary (Justice Demanded)
Comprehensive Summary:
Aaron Surina, the involved children’s father, affirms multiple instances of bias and unfair treatment in his court case concerning his children’s relocation. Despite his timely objection to the move and his request for custody modification, Sirinya Surina, the mother, relocated without notifying either him or the court, thereby violating court orders and Washington State’s governing laws on child relocation.
She also failed to communicate her intentions to alter the children’s schools or purchase a new home, actions Aaron alleges were designed to hinder his efforts to secure tutoring and other necessities for his children. Such actions reflect a negligent disregard for parental responsibilities. Notably, Aaron’s objection to the relocation was filed before Sirinya submitted her notice of intent to relocate, indicating her apparent disregard for legal protocol.
Despite these issues, Aaron’s objection hearing was not scheduled with the assigned judge, raising the possibility of judicial bias. However, the court did find that Sirinya lacked good cause to move and change the children’s school districts without approval.
On September 14, 2024, the court granted Aaron’s request to maintain the children’s current school in Spokane, where they have demonstrated academic success and established support networks. Despite this, Sirinya had already relocated without seeking necessary temporary orders for the move, leading to her being sanctioned by the court for dishonesty.
Additionally, despite the petitioner’s repeated failure to submit the required tax documents for 2020 and 2022, no action was taken against them. This refusal not only challenges the court’s authority but also unduly postpones the resolution of tax exemption issues. The court’s failure to react to this defiance can be seen as a form of judicial bias.
The petitioner agreed to provide these missing tax documents on June 23, 2023, to avoid being held in contempt of court. Yet, this issue remains unresolved, demonstrating a lack of accountability enforced by the court. The petitioner’s continual refusal to provide court-ordered tax exemptions, and the lack of a contempt ruling after the hearing, suggests possible bias in favor of the petitioner.
Furthermore, the petitioner’s refusal to provide a financial declaration for the custody hearing adds to the list of unethical conduct, further demonstrating a disregard for transparency and fairness within the court proceedings.
In conclusion, the perceived lack of court intervention concerning the petitioner’s continual defiance of court orders and refusal to provide necessary documents represents a significant injustice against Aaron Surina. He continues to fight for his children’s welfare and stability amidst these continuous difficulties.
About The Author
