Document: SUMMONS & PET FOR DISSOLUTION
Link: [Open PDF](https://42o.org/l3g4l//1.0 SUMMONS & PET FOR DISSOLUTION 2017-08-14 .pdf)
Filing Date: 2017-08-14
Summary (Justice Demanded)
The document in question is a summons and petition for dissolution of marriage involving Aaron Michael Surina as the respondent. From Aaron’s perspective, there are several instances of potential unethical conduct and bias evident in the proceedings. The document fails to address the well-being and best interests of Aaron’s children, David and Andrew Surina, focusing solely on the dissolution of the marriage. T
here is a lack of consideration for any allegations of violence against the children by the petitioner, Sirinya Surina, which reflects a bias and disregard for the safety of the children. Additionally, there is a denial of statutory relief for Aaron to protect his children from harm or address any injustices, indicating unfair treatment and a violation of his rights. The lack of transparency and due process in the document further hinders Aaron’s ability to navigate the legal process effectively and protect his rights. Overall, the document suggests potential unethical conduct, judicial bias, and injustices against Aaron Surina and his children in the legal proceedings related to the dissolution of marriage.
The document in question is a summons and petition for dissolution of marriage involving Surina as the respondent, filed by Sirinya Surina in the Superior Court of Washington, County of Spokane. From Aaron’s perspective, multiple instances of potential unethical conduct and injustices are evident throughout the document.
The document primarily focuses on the dissolution of the marriage between Aaron and Sirinya, with minimal consideration for the well-being and best interests of their children, David and Andrew. There is a lack of emphasis on child custody, visitation arrangements, and the children’s welfare, raising concerns about the court’s failure to prioritize the minors’ rights.
Furthermore, the language used in the document appears to favor Sirinya as the petitioner, potentially indicating bias in the judicial process. Aaron’s perspective and requests regarding child custody, visitation, and support are seemingly overlooked, suggesting a lack of fairness and impartiality in the proceedings.
Sirinya’s requests for spousal support, payment of legal fees, and protection orders against Aaron raise additional red flags regarding potential unfair treatment and power imbalances in the legal proceedings. The lack of consideration for Aaron’s financial situation and ability to comply with these demands further highlights the unjust nature of the situation.
Overall, the document reflects a concerning pattern of unethical conduct, judicial bias, and potential injustices that Aaron and his children may be facing. It is crucial for the court to address these issues and ensure a fair resolution that prioritizes the well-being and rights of the children involved, while also upholding principles of fairness and justice in the legal process.
Moreover, the petition requests a restraining order against Mr. Surina, which could be seen as an aggressive move, possibly indicating an unjust assumption of wrongdoing on Mr. Surina’s part without apparent evidence. This restraining order seeks to limit his movement and interaction with his children, implying a negative portrayal of him, which could be considered unfair in the absence of a clear justification.
The petition also requests Mr. Surina to pay for all legal and professional fees related to the case, as well as spousal support, without providing any context or explanation of his financial situation. This potentially places an unjust financial burden on Mr. Surina.
Furthermore, the petitioner’s request for child support, including day care expenses, and her wish to equally divide the tax exemptions for their dependent children, may seem unbalanced if Mr. Surina’s financial situation or his involvement in his children’s lives are not taken into account.
Overall, the document appears to favor the petitioner, without providing a comprehensive account of Mr. Surina’s perspective or circumstances, which may indicate an unjust treatment towards him.
The requests made by the petitioner’s attorney, Keith A. Glanzer, raise concerns about potential bias or lack of impartiality, further emphasizing the need for a fair and just outcome for Aaron and his children in the legal proceedings.
About The Author
