Rene M Netherton GAL Court Appointed Child Abuser

View the Pilot for MURPHY’S JUSTICE Television Starring Susan Murphy Milano!

2012-02-23T00:19:00.001-05:00

This is HOT…This is NOW…It’s here and it’s HAPPENING!

ImaginePublicity has just received the rough pilot for a new television show, MURPHY’S JUSTICE and we need you to take a look! We are in important negotiations to make this show a reality. We value and need your immediate feedback!

Murphys Justice ROCKS! Its long over do that a expert like Susan is taking these cases HEAD ON!!!
Why was Josh Powell allowed to even have those kids? Why was his fairy tale story from Josh about Susan just up and gone even heard? Where in the HELL is common sense? If mommy goes missing in the middle of the night a stain in the rug, a fan on the wet stain in middle of December WTF?? who don’t get this I mean come on already?
Josh Powell was Always a Person of Interest, this NEVER NEVER should have happened.
He should have been charged, those kids should have been removed... to hell w fathers rights to abuse-- perfect case here.
Person of Interest in a Murder of a mother and FATHER keeps kids, moves out of state gets popped for child porn, then he looses kids then he hacks them to death and blows up the house!
Enough Already!!! Drop the Domestic,drop all the excuses for daddy.....Start charging these batterers for ASSAULT not domestic- give theses mothers a chance for christ sake -- assault, crowbars, is NOT domestic—its dead. Josh Powell should have been charged for her murder when she disappeared!!!
Murphys Justice it’s long needed thumbs up for taking these cases of peoples lives HEAD on!

New study -- Fathers kill children for revenge on their mothers: "A new study of child murders... http://t.co/c4W1sKdt

Susan Powell, Fathers Rights, Killer Dads, Domestic Violence, Coercive Control, Court Whores, Evidentiary Abuse Affidavit, Lives, Cases, Real People, Real , Supervised Visitation is WRONG!!!!

PLEASE GO TO YOUTUBE “LIKE” AND LEAVE COMMENTS!

Tell us what you think!
What do YOU want to see discussed?
What guests would YOU like to see in future shows?

Holding My Hand Through Hell by Susan Murphy Milano (murphymilanojournal.blogspot.com)
How to Survive a Relationship During Divorce and Custody: The Susan Murphy Milano- Show January 19, 2012 at 2:00 PM Eastern(murphymilanojournal.blogspot.com)
The Susan Murphy Milano Show “Time’s Up!” Thursday 2/2/2012 at 2pm ET (murphymilanojournal.blogspot.com)

CINC for minor child Pediatrician Medical Records indicate sexual abuse from father Hal Richardson

2012-02-03T11:06:00.001-05:00

http://www.docstoc.com/docs/document-preview.aspx?doc_id=50421823

1999 march 23rd CINC for minor child Pediatrician Medical Records indicate sexual abuse from father Hal Richardson

Domestic Violence Continued: Contested Child Custody Through Protracted Litigation

2012-02-02T17:20:00.001-05:00

"Domestic Violence Continued: Contested Child Custody", is a 28 minute documentary produced by Dr. Sharon K. Araji, Professor and Chair, Department of Sociology at UCD. The video focuses on victims of domestic violence sharing their stories about what happened to them when they left their abusive partners and became involved in contested child custody cases. It features police and officers of the court who are knowledgeable about these types of cases, and interviews with Tanya Brown, Nicole Brown-Simpson's sister, Dr. Robert Geffner, international expert on the effects of domestic violence on children, and Lundy Bancroft, international expert on DV and contested child custody.

Colorado Documentary Participants: Denver Police Department DV Unit Officers Randy Royal and Benito Trujillo; Director, Family Tree, Scott Shields; Attorney and Advisor to Project Safeguard, Chris Radolf; and several Protective Mothers from area.

Documentary presentation held in conjunction with publication of book, "Domestic Violence, Abuse and Child Custody" (April 2009), and Protective Mother's march on nation's capital, May 9th, 18th, 19th and 20th to raise awareness of the issue that is the focus of the documentary.
Co-Sponsors: UCD Sociology, Alpha Kappa Delta International Honor Society, Women's and Gender Studies Program, and Center on Domestic Violence, School of Public Affairs Program Editing Award: UC Denver, Center for Faculty Excellence.

Program Promotional Award: UC Denver, CLAS Dean's Fund for Faculty Development

Topeka, KS: Safe Visit Looses United Way Funding, A Child trafficking, Batterer Friendly, Custody Switch Program. Fatherhood Initiatives Give Batterers Custody

2012-01-31T11:45:00.001-05:00

Custody Switch - Safe Visit of Topeka, Kansas - The Scam, Court Ordered Abuse for profit-

Because of the Fathers Rights Initiatives. Mommies NOT needed. Just Access Visitation Programs.

It’s about time!!!! YEAH!!!! one less, so many more to go….

Safe Visit and the many other programs that have morphed in the past two decades Odyssey, TREC, Fathers Rights Topeka and all the many many other so called metal health supposed professionals—and simple ‘social workers’ -who found easy $$- e.g. Connie Sanchez, Jenny Shaw, Kara Haney, (just to name a very few) who ‘charge $’ to SUPERVISE a Mother’s Visits with HER own Children.

I had not finished this chapter in my “Leaving The War Zone” I find it very difficult to write about the horrific human rights crimes that Kansas committed, allowed, continues… to my daughter and I, all to turn a buck. But due to the recent article about Safe Visit and Connie Sanchez in Topeka Kansas, "United Way pulls funding on Safe Visit program"

I publish below what I have written thus far and WHY all these so called –do good- human experiment-Programs [may be profitable to ‘Hitler’ type persona’s-this HUMAN Experiment, social engineering Program FAILURE] for use to follow up on article about Save Visit Loosing their Funding. And HOPEFULLY, God please… Closing by February.....(Note in the article it states ‘max 30 one hour supervised visits.’)

Rikki and I were SUPERVISED there for over Decade - 15 YEARS. Incredible. Two lives completely destroyed ... the best they could come up with was a limit of 30 hours. If this had been the rule (or if it had never existed in the first place) in the many years of it's inception in 1995 and in 1996 when we were 1st Court Ordered to the 'human trafficking' and 'Take Battered Mothers Children and give to Abusers Program' aka Safe Visit. These people need to go down, them and all ACCESS VISITATION aka Custody Switch Programs for Batterers.

Perhaps..…....a mother and daughter would know each today if 30 hours was max......As is, the batterer Hal Richardson has maintained his bond of chains and imprisonment of my daughter, with the assistance from safe Visit and other anti mother, Abuser friendly individuals and businesses….there has been absolutely no contact in several years. Which is why I began writing or attempts to "Leaving The War Zone."

#####

Chapter Three – Safe Visit - The Custody Switch, The Scam, The Profit$

June 15^th 2011 7:00 A.M.

Rikki with her Mother Claudine Dombrowski. Casualties of Safe Visit Program Who Assist's Batterers In Getting Child Custody, While Erasing Mother.

This case leads in a Human Rights suit filed at the Inter American Commission Human Rights on behalf of all battered Mothers and their children.

‘Dombrowski et el. v US’

Leaving The War Zone Chapter Three: The Custody Switch

It’s Wednesday, ‘hump day’. I am sitting outside this cool morning drinking my coffee, feeling the warmth on my legs listening to the world waking up- I am reminded of a time –many years ago when Rikki and I were still safe. In W. Kansas in our in Pawnee rock.

I would sit outside drinking my coffee in the early morning quiet. The weather cool- watering my awesome flowers that I had landscaped for several years.

Our home was beautiful. We had a small pool 12 ft for Rikki her friends and I. These were warm memory days. Days when I knew where my daughter was, days when hope floated with each beating of her heart. I would love to watch her sleep- she sleeps like I do- rough. She snores- like I do- and inherited maternal trait from my own dear mother.

Allergies tend to hit us with a storm, but we never let them effect the beauty and joy of each precious day we had. At this time in the late 90’s we had only 3 weeks together before the week long hell visits would begin for her.

The courts start in the custody switch. A game that is now known to many mothers- “The Custody Switch” mine came on snail mail by the Judge with out motion from either party, without hearing, the judge simple on his own issued his own 9 page order on July 31, 2000 that Rikki would be living with her father. And that if I foreclosed on our beautiful home and quit my well paying state job (dad never paid child support - I never needed it - I had been working for the state of Kansas as a psychiatric nurse for almost 13 years ) I was to quit my job, severe all contact with my home, Rikkis home, and relocate to Topeka Kansas (the courts knowing that do to my physical injuries inflicted by daddy dearest that I would not be able to work in Topeka—Larned state hospital had made concessions for my physical disabilities- and Topeka state hospital had closed in 1996- when I moved to Pawnee Rock).

That day, July 31, 2000 will always mark the day-:the music died’.- we had after 6 years of heavy litigation and after I had spent in upwards of over 1 million dollars—my child was gone. I was forced into unemployment, homelessness, and no health care—all for “the best interest of the child’. Makes no sense does it? Daddy promptly tried to get me back into the house by forcing me to have sex to even see Rikki—I did. Who wouldn't.

By December of that same year, the last time I saw Rikki with out armed guard—daddy had beaten Rikki so badly, I could not allow her suffering anymore -- I confronted him—only to find that once again as a good ‘co-parenting’ (as quoted by Harry Moore Case manger—‘it’s called co-parenting deal with it”) I had the hell beat out of me again. (this is co-parenting).

I then found myself brutally raped that same beating Dec 16^th,2000 just two days after Rikki had been beaten, (she fell up the hill btw) her face swollen and tears in her eyes. God, Rikki I am so sorry, I am so sorry. I tried to protect her, I did the unthinkable. I reported it.

As all protective mothers are - I was swiftly denied any contact with my dear sweet Rikki for the next two years. Then when I was placed into supervised visits “SAFE VISIT” of TOPEKA—they were arm guard—hence began the next decade of our lives. When I was able to see her it was through safe visits only. The cost was excruciating, the time was only an hour—we could not hug we could not talk about anything past dull, how’s school etc. And never never about why we were even there, why mom and daughter could not even see each other in the park, outside or at home, or go anywhere.

We remained confined to a 10’ x 10’ room with 1 monitor, 1 supervisor, 1 armed Shawnee county sheriff guard – all within arm distance - the monitor wrote down everything we said - everything we did. They even would stop us when we would talk to fast, so they could catch up.

I am sorry Rikki. (of course- I am not to have access to these reports) I do have some reports that they sent to the court or to the guardian ad litem. Not all mind you but some. See here: SAFE VISIT REPORTS & MEMOS

I am brought back to present day, the sun warm on my legs. The cool morning air of a Kansas summer. A life time ago. I have no contact with Rikki. Its been more that a year and a half since I last talked to or saw her. I have always been able to follow her cyber prints. But they ceased a month ago. No one knows where she is—dad will not report her missing. He is dad after all—still with his child’s coffin and hunting rifle on the wall. No one sees a problem with this.

Where are you baby? I pray you are safe, I pray you are alive.

There have been no unidentified bodies in the 100 mile radius fitting her description. ‘whew’.

Since I am a nobody the police will not help inform me of her whereabouts—after all dad a snitch for the police has just helped to ‘bag’ a 60 person felony drug bust—so they are really protecting him. –as usual.

[Leaving The war Zone – A Battered Mother’s Memoirs For Her Daughter] Claudine Dombrowski

‘Monsters in the Closet’ Devastating View of Domestic Violence From a Child’s Perspective

2011-11-30T23:44:00.001-05:00

Verizon and National Domestic Violence Hotline Launch ‘Monsters,’ a Short Animated Video That Depicts Devastating View of Domestic Violence From a Child’s Perspective. The Courts Fail many children by giving them to the father who battered their mother, the child is literally left alone with her ‘monster’ daddy. Like Rene Netherton, – they ‘profit’ instead of ‘protect’.

BASKING RIDGE, N.J. —“Monsters,” a provocative new video, portrays the alarming impact of domestic violence on families and children, as seen through the eyes of a young girl. Produced and funded by theVerizon Foundation and supported by the National Domestic Violence Hotline, the video encourages the public to get involved in domestic violence prevention and education efforts, and also emphasizes that help for victims and their families is just a phone call away: 1-800-799-SAFE (1-800-799-7233).

Verizon Wireless customers can quickly reach the National Domestic Violence Hotline by dialing #HOPE. The hotline offers confidential help 24/7. To help support the hotline’s efforts, Verizon Wireless, through HopeLine has donated $75,000. HopeLine collects no-longer-used wireless phones and recycles or refurbishes them to support domestic violence victims and survivors.

The video, two minutes and 34 seconds long, graphically describes how domestic violence affects children. The child’s voice states:

“A child who lives with domestic violence lives in darkness. …She struggles to separate her nightmares from reality because there’s very little difference. The child who lives with domestic violence isn’t afraid of the dark. She’s afraid of her dad because the monster doesn’t live in her closet – it’s just down the hall.”

Studies suggest that between 3.3 million and 10 million children witness some form of domestic violence each year. And according to the National Coalition Against Domestic Violence, witnessing violence between parents or caregivers is the strongest risk factor for transmitting violent behavior from one generation to the next. The video notes that girls who witness abuse are more likely to be abused later in life, and boys are twice as likely to abuse their own partners – “because that’s the world they know.”

Rose Kirk, president of the Verizon Foundation, said:

“To end this devastating cycle of violence, we must motivate silent bystanders to take action. People need to understand that when they look the other way, they condone this deplorable behavior. Verizon is committed to preventing domestic violence by educating our employees, customers and the public about the importance of stepping in to help someone in need. We believe that this provocative video will help us accomplish this life-saving goal.”

According to some studies, less that 1 percent of domestic violence cases are reported to the police.

Dyanne Purcell, CEO of the National Domestic Violence Hotline, said: “It takes an incredible amount of courage to come forward and ask for help. The more established domestic violence is in our national dialogue, the more likely victims will be able to seek help and make a lasting change.”

The video concludes with the child narrator making a poignant plea for the public to help:

“Maybe you don’t wake up every day shaking, or jump every time the phone rings. But maybe you should look a little harder. Maybe it’s a friend, a co-worker, or your neighbor. …Your help could make all the difference. We need everyone to bring domestic violence into the light.”

Kirk said, “Please share the link to the ‘Monsters’ video with your family, friends, neighbors and colleagues. It’s a simple action that may have a huge impact.”

The “Monsters” video can be viewed athttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=367JvtoTm34.

U. S. Department of Justice v. Custody Court System

2011-11-25T08:54:00.001-05:00

(Battered Mothers, Abused Children are Being Further Battered and Abused by the US Courts failure to let Domestic Violence Mothers Leave With Their Children. Many Ask, “Why Doesn’t She Just Leave?” When it comes to Domestic Violence, besides all the other very unsafe reasons those with children will loose their children to the very animal who hurt them and their children. Many mothers,(most) have never seen their children again after the Courts gave their child[ren] to the Abusers. Most Children, if the survive, end up just like they were taught raised and reinforced by the Courts, as abusers themselves for boys and victims for girls. That is not county all the other trauma related issues. This has passed beyond just injustice but has stepped full fledge in Human Rights Violations. It truly is like the holocaust, the destruction of women and their children by the USA, Sanctioned Genocide Against Mothers and their Children. Right in Plain View, See: Mothers Day Law Suit filed Against the U.S. at the Inter American Commission Human Rights. (still pending)

From Times –Up!! Attorney Barry Goldstein

photo courtesy of Family Court Crisis-Abusers Getting Custody!

By Barry Goldstein

Protective mothers have been complaining about mistreatment by the custody court system, but have routinely been dismissed as “disgruntled litigants.” As recently as the beginning of the Battered Mothers Custody Conferences in 2004, there was little professional support for protective mothers. The mothers’ complaints have now been confirmed and supported by the domestic violence community, many women’s organizations, numerous governmental agencies, many in the academic community and a substantial body of research such as contained in our book DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, ABUSE and CHILD CUSTODY.

Last summer at the NCADV Conference, Dr. Daniel Saunders of the University of Michigan and some of his colleagues presented their findings from a major Department of Justice study that confirms the findings in our book and other research that the present custody court practices for domestic violence cases are deeply flawed. The publication of these findings has taken longer than expected as Dr. Saunders and the Justice Department seek to carefully present the information in a clear and accurate manner, but they should soon be available on the Department of Justice web site. Many of us who seek to reform the broken custody court system are excited about this study because it should be difficult for the courts to dismiss or ignore because of where it comes from. Significantly, the findings are incompatible with a continued belief that the present practices are working for the benefit of the children the courts are supposed to protect.

Custody Courts Frequently Disbelieve Valid Abuse Complaints

Custody courts have a particularly poor record in responding to domestic violence cases. The research demonstrates that court professionals reject a high percentage of valid complaints by protective mothers. This problem has been confirmed in many ways. It is confirmed based on the frequency of mistaken outcomes. Although battered mothers make deliberately false allegations only one or two percent of the time, in contested custody cases the alleged abuser wins custody or joint custody over seventy percent of the time. Subsequent events regularly confirm courts’ mistakes. This occurs when men found safe by the court professionals are later convicted or otherwise found to have to have committed domestic violence, sexual abuse, murder or other similar crimes.

The revelations of the Courageous Kids Network further demonstrate the frequency in which courts fail to recognize valid complaints of abuse. Courageous Kids are young adults who have aged out of their custody orders and decided to speak out about the harm caused by these orders. The context is important in understanding their stories. These are cases in which the court disbelieved the mothers’ abuse allegations and gave the fathers complete control. The children have been threatened, coerced and punished if they continue to complain about their father’s abuse or seek a relationship with their mother. In other words the fathers have had tremendous assistance in silencing the children. Accordingly the children now speaking out represent a small minority of those mistreated by fathers the court believed were safe. The descriptions by the Courageous Kids demonstrate the fathers deliberately sought to hurt the mother and children based upon their belief system that the mother had no right to leave them. The children have had little or no contact with their mothers often for many years so we know the mothers could not be influencing the children’s decision to speak out about the fathers’ abuse. These are all too common examples of cases in which the court professionals failed to believe valid allegations of abuse.

The research not only demonstrates the fact that the custody courts get a large majority of domestic violence cases wrong, but also that the standard practices used by court professionals are deeply flawed and make it difficult for judges to recognize legitimate complaints about domestic violence and child abuse.
Court professionals routinely discredit allegations of abuse based upon factors that are not probative. At the same time these professionals do not understand the importance of looking to the abusers’ patterns of controlling and coercive behavior in order to recognize domestic violence. The court professionals often make the mistake of considering each incident and each allegation separately. Genuine domestic violence experts understand the importance of context in recognizing domestic violence, but the mental health and other professionals relied on by the courts do not understand the importance of context and thus make it more difficult to recognize valid allegations of abuse.

One of the big obstacles to recognizing valid abuse complaints is the common use of mental health and other professionals without expertise in domestic violence. The main purpose of considering domestic violence in custody cases is to protect the safety of children. Nevertheless the evaluators relied on by custody courts rarely know how to conduct a safety assessment or what behaviors have been associated with higher lethality and other dangers. The evaluators do not understand domestic violence dynamics and often are unfamiliar with the effects of domestic violence on children or other information based upon the specialized body of scientific research that could be used to better understand domestic violence issues and recognize truthful allegations of abuse.

The new Department of Justice study helps explain why the evaluators and other professionals relied on by custody courts routinely fails to recognize domestic violence. The study found that most evaluators and other professionals relied on by the courts do not have adequate domestic violence training and those with inadequate training are more likely to believe in the myth that women frequently make false allegations of abuse to gain an advantage in litigation. The professionals who believe this myth, in turn are more likely to make recommendations that harm children. In other words judges have little chance to protect the children under their control as long as they rely on these unqualified professionals and tend to believe their deeply flawed analysis.

Judges often become defensive when protective mothers or their attorneys request that any evaluator or other court professional be required to have domestic violence expertise in order to be appointed. We have repeatedly seen judges refuse to listen to domestic violence experts offered on behalf of protective mothers. The courts often focus on the need for a mental health degree even though the academic training for most mental health professionals included no or virtually no domestic violence instruction and the law does not require advance degrees to qualify as an expert (a common example is a mechanic without a high school degree who can testify as an expert in automotive repair based on experience and training).

In recent years most court systems have encouraged and usually required some domestic violence training for court professionals. This is a good thing but has often been implemented in ways that undermine the purpose. Many of the trainings include substantial misinformation such as the belief most contested custody cases are “high conflict” when the research establishes a large majority are really domestic violence cases. Some of the trainings even include Parental Alienation Syndrome (sometimes by another name because of its deserved notoriety) even though it was recently again rejected for inclusion in the DSM-V because there is no scientific basis for it. Many of the trainings fail to include domestic violence advocates or other genuine experts in domestic violence.

We have also seen some really good programs used to train court professionals, but I have heard many trainers complain that some of the judges, evaluators and lawyers pay little attention to the valuable information presented. In one Queens County, New York case I cross-examined an experienced evaluator who went to a really excellent domestic violence training in order to qualify as a parent coordinator. They provided numerous excellent research studies that could have helped him recognize domestic violence and protect children. During my cross-examination it became clear he never read the research and was unfamiliar with the current scientific research he needed to understand the case. When I pressed him about the training he described it as “not a life changing experience.” This was a man who needed a life changing experience because he failed to recognize the obvious history of abuse by the father, demanded the mother cooperate with her abuser and when she continued to try to protect herself and her son, the unqualified evaluator recommended custody for the abusive father. The judge failed to discredit the evaluator based on his failure to read or consider the current scientific research provided at the training.

We need much more and better trainings for court professionals, but there is also the danger that attending trainings can give judges and other professionals a false sense of confidence in their understanding of domestic violence. The findings by Dr. Saunders and his colleagues that most court professionals have inadequate training in domestic violence confirms our concern that in most cases the professionals relied on by the court are not qualified to participate in a domestic violence case without the assistance of a genuine expert. Even if the judge has received good training the court is likely to be influenced by unqualified evaluators and other court professionals.

The failure to possess adequate training in domestic violence means that it will be difficult for these professionals to recognize and respond effectively to domestic violence, but the widespread belief in the myth that women frequently make false allegations of abuse is a bias that strongly undermines the cases of protective mothers. These mistakes result in frequent findings denying the mother’s abuse allegations which is exactly what the other research has found. If a professional believes the myth they will expect to see false allegations and without training in how to recognize domestic violence they have little chance to get these cases right and protect the children. Even worse, courts having found against the mothers because of the deeply flawed practices and biases are severely punishing mothers and children because the mothers continue to believe their true allegations despite the disbelief of the unqualified court professionals.

A few months ago, in this forum, I wrote an article about the extreme decisions we often see in domestic violence cases. These are decisions in which the alleged abuser receives custody and the mother who was the primary attachment figure is limited to supervised or no visitation. The primary attachment figure is the parent who provided most of the child care during the first couple of years of the child’s life. When children are separated from their primary attachment figure they are significantly more likely to suffer depression, low self-esteem and to commit suicide when older. It can never be right to separate children from their primary attachment figure unless she is unsafe such as a drug addict, someone who beats the kids or otherwise poses a danger. In most of these cases the father allowed or even demanded the mother provide child care until she decided to leave him. It should be obvious that her decision to leave a man she found to be abusive does not make the mother unsafe. Unqualified court professionals frequently limit the mother’s contact with her children based upon some version of alienation or pathologizing the mother based on psychological tests that were not made for the populations seen in custody cases. We know the diagnosis is not safety related because the mother functions fine in all other aspects of her life except interacting with her abuser and the court professionals supporting him. These are not safety issues so these extreme decisions can never be beneficial to the children.

The reliance on court professionals with inadequate training and belief in the myth takes place in the context of many other common mistakes discussed in earlier research. The courts cannot protect mothers and children in domestic violence cases if they cannot recognize domestic violence when it is present. The frequent decisions that harm children are confirmed by later findings and information, the extensive research court professionals routinely fail to consider and the new Department of Justice study and they provide multiple confirmations of the present inability of custody courts to recognize domestic violence and child abuse when it exists.

Misuse of Mothers’ Anger and Emotion

Let’s look at this issue from the mother’s perspective and in the context of her experience. These are domestic violence cases. The father usually has a long history of controlling and coercive behaviors and the mother has finally gained the courage and resources to leave her abuser in order to protect her children. She is fearful because of the many threats he made of what he would do if she left and knowledge that the most dangerous time for a woman is after she has left. She is angry at the way he has mistreated her and often the children. She may be worried about her ability to support and protect her children because her partner has been telling her how useless she is throughout their relationship.

Even if the father’s physical abuse ends when he no longer has access to the mother (which makes unqualified court professionals believe he is now safe), he continues his domestic violence through litigation abuse and often other ways. The abusers often use any contact provided by the court to seek reconciliation and/or to harass and attack her verbally or psychologically. Many women expect the courts to protect her children because the evidence is so overwhelming and instead find the court pressuring her to cooperate with her abuser and punishing her if she tries to protect her children from a man they have found to be hostile and dangerous. In other words she has good reason to be angry and emotional and in fact this would be a normal reaction to her experiences.

The research contained in our book and elsewhere supports this understanding and analysis. We discussed the common mistake of custody courts that treat the mother’s actions as a litigant as if they were an indication of her behavior as a parent. Over forty states and many judicial districts have created court sponsored gender bias committees. These committees have found widespread bias particularly against women litigants. One of the common examples of gender bias was blaming women for the actions of their abusers. One of the typical examples of this bias is when courts blame mothers for their anger and emotion caused by the father’s mistreatment of them and their children. In many cases the abusers deliberately harass or pressure them shortly before a court appearance is scheduled in order to obtain an emotional reaction the court is likely to misunderstand. Abusers tend to be extremely manipulative and so after their abuse that the judge does not see, come to court calm and cooperative. Court professionals are often fooled by this act.

The new Department of Justice study confirms what we said in our book and other similar research. Dr. Saunders found that court professionals frequently treat mothers’ anger and emotion as far more important than it actually is in terms of the well being of children. These professionals may be uncomfortable with the mothers’ emotions particularly if she criticizes their response to the father’s abuse. Clearly these are difficult and unpleasant issues to confront. The misinformation treating contested custody as if it were “high conflict” when it is actually domestic violence contributes to the misunderstanding of the mothers’ anger and emotion. The professionals are focused on forcing the parties to cooperate even though this is not the best approach for children. When the parties have difficulty cooperating and certainly in domestic violence cases, parallel parenting is a more effective approach for children. The problem, as demonstrated by the Saunders’ study is that these professionals are focused on their beliefs and preferences rather than research about what works best for children. The custody courts did not get into the practice of looking to current scientific research and particularly the specialized body of research about domestic violence because there was no such research when the initial court practices were developed. We now have substantial research that would help inform court decisions and avoid the frequent mistakes but court professionals rarely look to this research to help them make better decisions. This is why we rarely see custody courts weigh the benefits and harms to children of a proposed resolution. The Department of Justice study establishes that these flawed practices lead to decisions that hurt children.

Cottage Industry Supporting Abusive Fathers

We often hear complaints about corruption in the custody court system. This belief is supported by the many cases in which courts make findings that are far removed from a fair evaluation of the evidence and decisions that seem to be disconnected from the well being of the children involved. There are cases of outright corruption such as the Garson case in Brooklyn, New York, but more often, I believe courts create the appearance of corruption because of bias, ignorance and deeply flawed practices. One of my concerns with complaints about corruption is that it makes it harder for judges in the broken system to hear the complaints and create the reforms that are needed. An important contributing factor to the widespread belief in corruption is the cottage industry that has been created to support abusive fathers.

Most contested custody cases involve abusive fathers seeking custody as a tactic to pressure their victims to return or punish them for leaving. Domestic violence is all about control so these abusive fathers usually have controlled the family finances and have these resources to support their custody litigation. Some lawyers and mental health professionals have figured out that they can make a large income by supporting practices and approaches that support abusers. We often see them advertise as supporting “fathers’ rights.” In many cases we see fathers’ attorneys and GALs promoting the appointment of evaluators who support abusive fathers. It is particularly frustrating when judges refer to these professionals who regularly support abusers as “neutral professionals.”

Protective mothers often have no chance when these biased professionals are appointed regardless of how strong their cases may be. Many of the mothers have complained that the evaluators and GALs make misrepresentations to the court in order to justify findings in favor of the abusive fathers paying their fees. When such professionals lie to the court about the evidence or to justify fees they did not earn, the mothers are justified in complaints suggesting corruption.
Many of these biased professionals strongly support PAS despite a lack of scientific justification. Significantly, PAS is based upon the assumption that virtually every complaint by mothers about the father’s abuse is deliberately false. The Department of Justice study found a problem with inadequately trained professionals who believe the myth that women frequently make deliberately false allegations of abuse. The unqualified professionals supporting PAS are even worse assuming that virtually all such allegations are false. The courts have virtually no chance of making the right decision if they treat such biased professionals as having any credibility.
The Department of Justice study’s contribution to this issue is a finding that evaluators working for the court or the county made recommendations that worked better for children than those of evaluators in private practice. When Dr. Saunders described this finding at a workshop during the NCADV Conference I asked him if he thought the findings supported our concerns about the cottage industry that has developed to support abusive fathers. He agreed this was a good interpretation. Evaluators working for the court or county are not paid extra for each evaluation so they have no incentive to favor the wealthier parent.

Professionals often have fundamental conflicts of interest. Medical doctors who schedule tests or procedures will earn money from performing the services they recommend. Tests may be scheduled to shield the doctor from potential lawsuits rather than to benefit the patient. Lawyers who recommend going to trial, starting a lawsuit or making a motion will earn money when the client takes their advice. Similarly, mental health professionals benefit financially when patients accept recommendations for more services. The conflict of interest is largely unavoidable and the professionals are expected to have the integrity to act in their client’s best interests instead of their own. Unfortunately some of the evaluators and lawyers, particularly those supporting abusive fathers have not fulfilled this ethical obligation.

We have repeatedly seen problems in custody courts with mental health professionals and particularly ones sympathetic to abusive fathers making recommendations requiring protective mothers to use their unwanted and unneeded services. We see these biased professionals pathologizing mothers who have always taken good care of their children with diagnoses that are clearly wrong. This would include the frequent finding of rare conditions such as Munchausen Syndrome by Proxy, conditions like paranoia or delusional based on the mothers’ continued belief in the father’s abuse despite the failure of the court professionals to recognize his abuse and other emotional problems that magically seem to affect only her relationship with her abuser and the court. They seem oblivious to the fact that that she does fine in other parts of her life that under any unbiased circumstances would rule out the claimed diagnosis.

Some of these mistakes are clearly deliberate and qualify as corruption. Other cases may involve bias and ignorance and a lack of the needed qualifications as the Saunders’ study demonstrates. When the professionals who are part of the cottage industry engage in gender bias they usually do so without realizing it. Many actually believe in the theories and practices they use despite a lack of scientific basis. Some of this can be explained by confirmation bias where the professional focuses on information or accusations that support what the professional expects to find and ignores information that undermines their theories and assumptions. We see this kind of mistake frequently in domestic violence custody cases and the mental health professional is often unconscious that they are engaging in confirmation bias. In fact they are likely to become defensive and angry at the suggestion. The Department of Justice study demonstrates the harm of using professionals who are part of the cottage industry and the need for custody courts to screen court professionals to avoid relying on them. Even worse, courts often use these unqualified professionals to train other court professionals. This can only serve to spread misinformation which makes it harder for court officials to recognize the problems demonstrated by the Saunders’ study and other current scientific research.

Conclusion

The custody court system tends to look at each case and each issue or event in a case separately. This is based on a belief that just because a man slapped his wife on Monday does not mean he punched her on Friday. The court system uses stare decisis which means once a case or an issue has been decided the same parties cannot relitigate it. There are good reasons for these practices, but they work poorly in domestic violence cases because of the importance of context in understanding domestic violence. We often see cases where the court denies allegations of domestic violence and they may even have been right if there was insufficient evidence. Naturally the abuser continues his abusive behavior so more evidence becomes available, but many courts refuse to hear the new evidence or refuse to consider it in the context of the previous evidence because those issues were previously litigated. In doing this the court is denying itself the ability to recognize the pattern of the father’s abuse and protect the children. Domestic violence experts are confident that the custody court system is broken because we see the pattern of mistakes and harmful decisions, but the powers in the court system are offended at the criticism and cannot believe the problem because they refuse to look at the patterns.

The findings of the Department of Justice study, by itself, provides convincing documentation that the custody court system is getting a large majority of domestic violence custody cases wrong. It would be impossible for courts to get most cases right when most of the court professionals have inadequate domestic violence training, those with inadequate training tend to believe the myth that women frequently make false allegations, the courts are placing too much weight on mothers’ anger and emotion and the evaluators who earn additional money through appointment in custody cases are making decisions more harmful to children then those who do not have a financial incentive. This study was not made in a vacuum, but was produced in the context of a substantial and growing body of scientific research that establishes the custody courts are making bad decisions in contested custody cases that endanger children. The research also establishes that the standard practices used in the custody courts are deeply flawed and outdated.

I am hopeful that a study coming from the U. S. Department of Justice will be harder for the custody court system to ignore. They have a strong reputation and can only be considered neutral. Furthermore, the courts frequently seek grants and other funding from the Department of Justice. Protective mothers and their attorneys can cite this research and it should be harder for the courts to ignore. I can’t wait until it is published on the DOJ web site.

Barry Goldstein is a nationally recognized domestic violence expert, speaker, writer and consultant. He is the co-editor with Mo Therese Hannah of DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, ABUSE and CHILD CUSTODY. Barry can be reached by email at their web sitewww.Domesticviolenceabuseandchildcustody.com

One More Battleground: Domestic Violence, Child Custody, and the Batterers’ Relentless Pursuit of their Victims Through the Courts

2011-11-23T14:16:00.001-05:00

Courtesy Source: AMPP

SEATTLE JOURNAL FOR SOCIAL JUSTICE

[excerpt]

II. REASONS WHY BATTERERS USE FAMILY COURTS TO CONTINUE THEIR ABUSE

When a couple divorces, the legal system may become a symbolic battleground on which the male batterer continues his abuse. Custody and visitation may keep the battered woman in a relationship with the battering man; on the battleground, the children become the pawns.36

After looking at how domestic violence operates as a mechanism of control, perhaps it is not surprising to discover that batterers manipulate the courts and their victims during dissolution, custody, and visitation proceedings. After all,domestic violence is a pattern of behavior that is not easily reversed, so separation alone is unlikely to break the pattern of abuse.

There are numerous reasons why a batterer chooses to use the courts and the litigation process; many of them are explored below. Before delving into the specific reasons, it is important to discuss the frequency with which batterers decide to participate in family court proceedings.

As mentioned earlier, fathers who abuse are twice as likely to seek sole custody of their children as nonviolent fathers, and notably, abusive fathers are three times as likely to be in arrears of child support.37 In one recent study in Massachusetts, fifteen of the forty fathers (approximately 38 percent) who sought custody received sole or joint custody of the children, despite the fact that each and every one of these men were reported to have abused both the mother and the child/children prior to separation and continued to do so after separation.38

Thus, before exploring why courts may choose to disregard a history of domestic violence,39 it is important to note that a history of violence does not stop batterers from obtaining custody. In fact, a history of abuse seems to increase the likelihood that the batterer will seek custody.

So, why do batterers use family courts as a battleground at all? What is it about the courts, and family courts specifically, that is so appealing to them?

[because they can]

A. Only Available Contact Left

One of the most obvious reasons batterers use family courts is because it is often the only way they can legally maintain any contact with the survivor.40 After leaving their abuser, survivors may try to keep their contact information private in order to keep as much distance from the batterer as they can. They may seek formal protection through restraining orders or civil protection orders. They may move without allowing the batterer access to their current address or phone number. However, even if a survivor can achieve this physical distance from a batterer, the batterer may try to initiate contact through the courts by seeking custody of or visitation rights with his child/children. In this way,the courtroom may present an opportunity to prolong contact with the victim or seek contact that is not otherwise available.41

As mentioned earlier, not all batterers who abuse the mothers will abuse the children. Certainly, nuanced solutions exist that can provide an opportunity for fathers, even those with a history of domestic violence, to remain in some sort of communication with their children. Every family has unique circumstances that can allow for a variety of solutions;however, because the courts may be the only way and the only forum for abusive fathers to continue abusing their former spouse and children, it is important for courts to take a comprehensive look at each situation and to act carefully if a history of abuse is present.

See Full Document From Journal Here:
One More Battleground: Domestic Violence, Child Custody, and the Batterers’ Relentless Pursuit of their Victims Through the Courts

One More Battleground Domestic Violence, Child Custody, And the Batterers' Relentless Pursuit of Their Vict...

Topeka Kansas: Failure to Protect Violates Statutes

2011-09-23T09:01:00.001-04:00

Topeka Kansas: Failure to Protect Violates Statutes

The hour heated up in the Zeus Radio Studio starting with a discussion about the city of Topeka , KS decision to stop prosecuting domestic violence cases with my suggestion that the District Attorney obtain permits and go into the cemetery business. The city of Topeka is throwing victims' lives to the wolves disguised in sheep's clothing, more commonly known as the violent offenders.

The city is hiding behind the budget because frankly Kansas does not see intimate partner violence a crime.

The Shawnee County press release: September 15, 2011

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Contact: Dakota Loomis • 785.438.9449

Shawnee County DA’s Office and City of Topeka Working to Resolve Misdemeanor Case Filings

__________________________________________

Released in Cooperation with David Bevens · City of Topeka · City Communications Manager · 785.368.1642

Shawnee County District Attorney Chad Taylor and Interim City Manager Dan Stanley met today to discuss the prosecution of misdemeanor cases occurring within Topeka city limits. The meeting centered on how best to preserve public safety given recent budget cuts sustained by the District Attorney’s Office. Both the District Attorney’s Office and the City of Topeka are hopeful that an amicable agreement will be reached shortly that will be in the best interest of all Topekans. Discussions will continue over the course of the next few days and will focus on crafting a mutually agreed upon resolution that will ensure the efficient prosecution of all city misdemeanors.

# # #

Translation if your dog bites someone you will be prosecuted. If you spouse or significant other threatens or causes significant bodily injury, you are out of luck!

According to the National Coalition against Domestic Violence, current data, there are16,800 homicides (reported)attributed to intimate partner homicide per year and $2.2 million in medically treated injuries costing $37 billion per year!

______________________________________

Is Topeka Kansas in violation of their very own State Statues?

22-2307 : Domestic violence calls; written policies to be adopted by law enforcement agencies; contents. (a) All law enforcement agencies in this state shall adopt written policies regarding domestic violence calls as provided in subsection (b). These policies shall be made available to all officers of such agency.(b) Such written policies shall include, but not be limited to, the following:
(1) A statement directing that the officers shall make an arrest when they have probable cause to believe that a crime is being committed or has been committed;
(2) a statement defining domestic violence;
(3) a statement describing the dispatchers' responsibilities;
(4) a statement describing the responding officers' responsibilities and procedures to follow when responding to a domestic violence call and the suspect is at the scene;
(5) a statement regarding procedures when the suspect has left the scene of the crime;
(6) procedures for both misdemeanor and felony cases;
(7) procedures for law enforcement officers to follow when handling domestic violence calls involving court orders, including protection from abuse orders, restraining orders and a protective order issued by a court of any state or Indian tribe;
(8) a statement that the law enforcement agency shall provide the following information to victims, in writing:
(A) Availability of emergency and medical telephone numbers, if needed;
(B) the law enforcement agency's report number;
(C) the address and telephone number of the prosecutor's office the victim should contact to obtain information about victims' rights pursuant to K.S.A. 74-7333 and 74-7335 and amendments thereto;
(D) the name and address of the crime victims' compensation board and information about possible compensation benefits;
(E) advise the victim that the details of the crime may be made public;
(F) advise the victim of such victims' rights under K.S.A. 74-7333 and 74-7335 and amendments thereto; and
(G) advise the victim of known available resources which may assist the victim; and
(9) whether an arrest is made or not, a standard offense report shall be completed on all such incidents and sent to the Kansas bureau of investigation.
History: L. 1991, ch. 93, § 1; L. 1996, ch. 208, § 3; July 1.

Below is the show I urge everyone to listen. Can a class action suit be filed in the State of Kansas for failure per the current statutes? It is worth investigating? In the coming months we will gather a team of legal experts to visit and review at the Federal level and the State of Kansas's "failure to protect."

Attorney and Author Barry Goldstein and National Advocate and Mothers Without Custody Expert Claudine Dombrowski

Sep 22, 2011

To listen to Show CLICK HERE --------> Susan Murphy Milano: TIME'S UP!! 9-22-2011

Download Podcast - Susan Murphy Milano: TIME'S UP!! 9-22-2011
Right mouse click and choose "save as" or "save link as" to download a podcast mp3 file to your computer.

A victims first scream is help;

A victims second scream is justice

****

Susan Murphy Milano is a staff member of the Institute for Relational Harm Reduction and Public Pathology Education . She is a specialist with intimate partner violence cases and prevention strategies and high risk cases and available for personal consultations through the Institute. She is also part of the team at Management Resources Limited of New York.
Susan is the author of "Time's Up: A Guide on How to Leave and Survive Abusive and Stalking Relationships,"Moving out, Moving on, and Defending Out Lives. Susan is the host ofThe Susan Murphy Milano Show, "Time's Up!" . She is a regular contributor to the nationally syndicated "The Roth Show " with Dr Laurie Roth and a co-host on Crime Wire .
If you would like to schedule Susan Murphy Milano for interviews, please contact: ImaginePublicity PO BOX 14946 Surfside Beach, SC 29587 Phone: 843.808.0859 email- contact@imaginepublicity.com

The Susan Murphy Milano Show- "Scared To Leave Afraid To Stay" 2:00 PM Eastern Time Live

2011-09-22T07:17:00.001-04:00

Go to www.herewomentalk.com

and listen in live!

The Susan Murphy Milano Show- "Scared To Leave Afraid To Stay" 2:00 PM Eastern Time Live

Claudine Dombrowski could very well be considered a “Wounded Warrior” in the fight against intimate partner violence. Fighting her personal battle against her abuser for over 16 years, she’s also taken her fight across the nation helping several other battered mothers who have lost custody of their beloved children to the very person who abused them.

In a recent development in her own backyard in Shawnee County, KS, District Attorney Chad Taylor decided to hand over misdemeanor cases, like Claudine Dombrowski’s, to the city, due to funding issues. Dombrowski knew the ones to pay the price for this decision would be those caught in the crosshairs of the abuser’s rage when released, and has taken her outrage to the media.(http://imaginepublicity.com/2011/09/15/the-lights-went-out-in-topeka-for-victims-of-domestic-violence-claudine-dombrowski-speaks-out/)

Through organizing globally, Claudine Dombrowski, and other battered mothers, have foundedAmerican/Australia Mothers Political Party to bring attention and educate others. Through combining their online efforts across the globe, they are able to link together, not always physically, but by forming groups through the wonders of technology and carrying their message far and wide.

Barry Goldstein has fought battles in the trenches and the courtrooms in an attempt to keep battered women from losing their treasure, their children. He continues to work with agencies and educators and has joined his expertise with others in the battle against violence in the home. Goldstein is a nationally recognized domestic violence expert, speaker, writer and consultant. He is the co-editor with Mo Therese Hannah of DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, ABUSE and CHILD CUSTODY. Barry can be reached by email at their web site www.Domesticviolenceabuseandchildcustody.com

BARRY GOLDSTEIN, attorney, teacher, author and advocate for women abused by their partner (and too often the courts) has written a book for women seeking to leave their abusers and for their friends, family, supporters and advocates. SCARED TO LEAVE AFRAID TO STAY Paths From Family Violence to Safety tells the story of ten women as they left their abusers seeking a better life. The book shows in these abuse cases how courts handle legal issues such as orders of protection, custody, visitation, support, marital property and criminal prosecutions. It tells about the resourcesavailable for women seeking to leave their abuser. Click the links to learn more about the book, author or to view frequently asked questions (FAQs). The book is published byRobert D. Reed Publishers and is available at book stores online and off.

Go to www.herewomentalk.com and listen in live!

Thursday, September 22, 2pm ET

Imagine Publicity: “Wounded Warrior” Claudine Dombrowski and Activist Barry Goldstein Join The Susan Murphy Milano Show, Time’s Up

2011-09-20T11:35:00.001-04:00

MARKETING.PROMOTIONS.PUBLICITY

http://imaginepublicity.com/2011/09/18/wounded-warrior-claudine-dombrowski-and-activist-barry-goldstein-join-the-susan-murphy-milano-show-times-up/

SUSAN MURPHY MILANO

“Wounded Warrior” Claudine Dombrowski and Activist Barry Goldstein Join The Susan Murphy Milano Show, Time’s Up

The Susan Murphy Milano Show, “Time’s Up!”

Thursday, September 22, 2pm ET

Listen LIVE at: Here Women Talk

In a recent development in her own backyard in Shawnee County, KS, District Attorney Chad Taylor decided to hand over misdemeanor cases, like Claudine Dombrowski’s, to the city, due to funding issues. Dombrowski knew the ones to pay the price for this decision would be those caught in the crosshairs of the abuser’s rage when released, and has taken her outrage to the media.( http://imaginepublicity.com/2011/09/15/the-lights-went-out-in-topeka-for-victims-of-domestic-violence-claudine-dombrowski-speaks-out/)

Through organizing globally, Claudine Dombrowski, and other battered mothers, have founded American/Australia Mothers Political Party to bring attention and educate others. Through combining their online efforts across the globe, they are able to link together, not always physically, but by forming groups through the wonders of technology and carrying their message far and wide.

A Hard Hit to DV Victims by The Criminal Justice System in Kansas

2011-09-19T08:25:00.001-04:00

http://www.examiner.com/domestic-violence-abuse-in-honolulu/claudine

Dara Carlin, M.A.

, Honolulu Domestic Violence & Abuse Examiner

It's Actually Come Down To This

Until recent years Civics, Democracy and Criminal Justice were only topics from a class that I was supposed to be paying attention to when I was in high school. Unable to see how any of it was going to really matter or have anything to do with my life, I opted to half-listen, paying just enough attention to catch the main concepts but spent more time passing notes, daydreaming and doodling the time away until the bell would release me from my imprisonment.

I got that a misdemeanor wasn’t as bad as a felony and figured if I just steered clear of both, I should have no problem. For those of you who were as interested as I was in high school about the criminal justice system, I offer you the following crash course before laying out what the newest alert is (so you can be as concerned about it as I am!)

While a misdemeanor is better known as “a lesser crime” in comparison to a felony the distinction goes just a tad bit further in that a misdemeanor is actually defined as a crime that could land a person in jail for less then a year as opposed to a felony that’s actually defined as a crime that could land a person in jail for more then a year.

Murder is unanimously held as a felony across the United States, but otherwise the definition of crimes occurs at the state level. So, for example, while it may seem that strangulation would be considered a felony (a more serious crime) it didn’t become a Class C felony (a sentence that can carry up to 5 years in jail) in Hawaii until relatively recently (2006). Prior to 2006, can you imagine being strangled then being told it’s “just” a misdemeanor?

Even more disillusioning is landing/finding oneself in the criminal justice system (that has very little resemblance to what you see on “Law & Order”). Actually, my brother-in-law (a corrections officer) and I recently ruined a criminal justice-related movie for my sister when we each piped up instinctually with “They can’t do that” or “That’d NEVER happen” comments throughout the movie and totally ruined it for my sister who was just trying to enjoy it for the plot and storyline. (Sorry!)

In real-life, what’s supposed to happen when a crime occurs is someone notifies the police about “the offense” (proper terminology) and then the police will do an investigation (talk to the victim and/or alleged perpetrator if possible, gather evidence, interview witnesses, etc.) the findings of which will all this go into a report. For simplicity’s sake, let’s say this is a misdemeanor where the alleged perpetrator is not arrested for whatever s/he’s been accused of. The completed report then gets forwarded to the Prosecutor’s Office for review where the Prosecutor (called a District Attorney in other jurisdictions) will decide whether the offense contains enough merit to be prosecuted or not.

Here’s a critical piece of information that many don’t realize: if the Prosecutor accepts the case and moves forward on it, the case “belongs” to the state NOT the victim whose been wronged; the victim becomes a witness for the state/prosecution.

Why is this important? Because in many domestic violence cases where the abuser is ignorant to all this, the abuser thinks that the victim can “call off” the Prosecution or that the victim has the ability to simply “drop” the case – neither of which are true – but from his perspective what’s true is irrelevant; what she does (or doesn’t do) is. Can you see how this could shape up to be a pretty dangerous situation if an offense has occurred, the abuser HASN’T been arrested and then the Prosecutor decides to take the case?

Next step: court. This is where the abuser enters a plea of either guilt, no contest (not admitting guilt but not proclaiming innocence either) or not guilty to what s/he’s being accused of. If the abuser says “Not guilty” the next step is a trial where witnesses and evidence can be presented by the Prosecution and Defense BUT before the plea is formally entered a couple of “strange things” can happen…

The Defense OR Prosecution can propose a plea bargain where the abuser is afforded the opportunity to "plea down" to a lesser offense, ie: a domestic violence offense being reduced to harassment. Plea bargains can be offered for a number of reasons, but the long-term consequences of a plea down from domestic violence doesn’t work well in addressing or rectifying the problem of DV. If an abuser pleas down to harassment (for example) then there’s “no domestic violence” = no DV intervention services, the abuser will not reflect a DV history stemming from the offense and the record will not count the case as a DV one which can mislead the public in terms of misrepresenting the size of the problem (DV in the community isn’t as big of a problem as harassment is).

Similar to dropping the case, the victim has no say or influence over plea bargaining (so if you’ve had the courage to take your case “all the way” and have cooperated with the Prosecution, can you imagine how it’d feel to be told by the Prosecution that your case has been “settled” because THE ABUSER'S agreeing to call what he did to you "harassment" rather than DV? That instead of going to jail, the abuser has agreed to community service hours instead? But it could be worse...

How do you think it would feel as a victim if your DV case ended before it even started? That after mustering up the courage to report to police who dutifully submitted their report to the Prosecutors, that it was turned away NOT for lack of evidence or witnesses but due to lack of funding? (And how do you think your abuser's going to feel knowing that you turned him in, tried to have him put away but failed so now he's free to "talk" to you about it?)

Or suppose the judge just released your abuser from custody saying “Awww, forget it, case dismissed” because s/he knew that the Prosecution wasn’t going to/couldn’t afford to prosecute it? If that sounds like an improbable breakdown in our criminal justice system, check out what’s just gone down in Topeka, Kansas: http://www.kansasfirstnews.com/news/local/story/Topeka-domestic-abuse-survivor-trembling-over-DAs/sgAbRRlYaE2M6ljJGYtzFA.cspx

Our criminal justice system was not founded upon dollars and cents and last I knew justice isn't supposed to be decided after a cost-benefit analysis, but Kansas has just set a terrifying precedent by telling domestic violence victims that their lives - and the crimes committed against them - aren't worth their state's time, money or effort. This is a sad day for domestic violence victims in Kansas and a day that I hope will never dawn here in Hawaii.

For a more formal/thorough explanation of the misdemeanor/felony processes in Hawaii, go to http://www1.honolulu.gov/prosecuting/flowchart.htm

Topeka, Kansas - Domestic Abuse Survivor Trembling Over DA's Decision to Pass Down Misdemeanors DV is NOT A CRIME in TOPEKA, KANSAS

2011-09-16T12:08:00.001-04:00

PLEASE COMMENT ON ORIGINAL ARTICLE! We need OUTRAGE to stop this political game playing at the expense of women.

Right now in Topeka Kansas—DOMESTIC VIOLENCE is LEGAL. Since last week’s decision of the County DA to stop prosecuting Domestic Violence in the city limits, there have been 35 Domestic Violence arrests that have WALKED with no charges!

The City manager is considering a repeal in the City Ordinances that Domestic Violence is NOT A CRIME within the city. http://bit.ly/nCxc5M

http://www.kansasfirstnews.com/news/local/story/Topeka-domestic-abuse-survivor-trembling-over-DAs/sgAbRRlYaE2M6ljJGYtzFA.cspx#

Topeka domestic abuse survivor trembling over DA's decision to pass down misdemeanors -

Topeka domestic abuse survivor trembling over DA's decision to pass down misdemeanors

http://www.kansasfirstnews.com/news/local/story/Topeka-domestic-abuse-survivor-trembling-over-DAs/sgAbRRlYaE2M6ljJGYtzFA.cspx#

16 years after enduring constant physical abuse, the memories still shake Claudine Dombrowski to the core. She says, "I was beaten with a crowbar, it was a misdemeanor. I've had both my wrist broken and it was a misdemeanor."

Dombrowski says she's disgusted at how poorly survivors are treated after making the terrifying decision to call authorities. She says community leaders see it as, "Let's put these victims in with weed control and dog at large and parking tickets. That's how important you are to our community."

Dombrowski says the word "misdemeanor" has such a harmless connotation and wishes people knew the horrible actions hiding behind it. She says, "I was pushed through plate glass windows and if I had not been in a relationship with this man, he would be in prison."

If the city does decide to take on the domestic abuse cases, Dombrowski hopes it's only until funding can be restored at the District Attorney's office. She says, "We've just jumped back 30 years into the dark ages, and it's very dark. The lights just went out in Topeka."

She says many times the misdemeanor charges get reduced to disorderly conduct and destruction of personal property, and she can't imagine how easy the abusers will have it in city courts. Dowbrowski says you can help domestic violence victims of Topeka by demanding more money for the District Attorney's office, so they can continue to protect the public.

UPDATE:
Wednesday morning, Topeka Interim City Manager Dan Stanley said there is some thought being given to repealing the city ordinances to force the prosecution back on the county. He says it will then be up to the D.A. to prioritize what cases should be prosecuted.
Stanley says he's concerned about what will happen to the individuals whose cases are not being prosecuted. He says, "We know of three cases where judges have released the people accused of domestic violence back out because it their understanding that the district attorney will not prosecute and so there may be more of these."

Topeka Police Officers are forwarding misdemeanor cases involving domestic violence to the District Attorney's Office. Stanley says the D.A.'s office has already turned away 30 cases. He believes the victims and their families are most affected.

Topeka Domestic Abuse Survivor Claudine Dombrowski Trembling Over DA's Decision to Pass Down Misdemeanors

2011-09-15T12:35:00.001-04:00

Topeka domestic abuse survivor trembling over DA's decision to pass down misdemeanors -

Topeka domestic abuse survivor trembling over DA's decision to pass down misdemeanors

http://www.kansasfirstnews.com/news/local/story/Topeka-domestic-abuse-survivor-trembling-over-DAs/sgAbRRlYaE2M6ljJGYtzFA.cspx#

When Shawnee County District Attorney Chad Taylor decided to hand over misdemeanor cases, like Dombrowski's, to the city, she knew it would weigh heaviest on victims of domestic violence. Knowing the consequences a victim could face when the abuser is arrested, then released, she advises victims not to call the police. She says, "You, as a survivor, know how to survive. You just keep surviving. If you call the police right now, and God forbid you end up with the city, you might die."
Dombrowski says she's disgusted at how poorly survivors are treated after making the terrifying decision to call authorities. She says community leaders see it as, "Let's put these victims in with weed control and dog at large and parking tickets. That's how important you are to our community."

Eleven years ago today 7-31-2000, Rikki Dombrowski was taken from her mother Claudine Dombrowski and given to convicted batterer HAL RICHARDSON

2011-07-31T13:51:00.001-04:00

HELL HAS A SPECIAL PLACE FOR ALL ABUSERS and ENABLERS (aka child traffickers) that have and are continuing the abuse by Hal Richardson. With the help of the local CourtWhores, M. Jill Dykes, Rene M. Netherton, Judge David Debenham, Don and Jason Hoffman

Eleven years ago today Rikki Dombrowski was taken from her mother Claudine Dombrowski and given to a convicted batterer on a ‘snail mail’ from crooked Judge Richard Anderson. He made a ‘deal’ and without motion from either party, without hearing he simply on his own ‘switched custody’ from Mother to ABUSER HAL RICHARDSON.

Mother Claudine Dombrowski has had little to no contact with her daughter since this illegal ‘action’ and ruling was made. The Judges following after this decision could have at anytime corrected a very wrong very unethical very damaging ruling.

Instead, they continued ‘litigation abuse’ of a battered mother and forced her only child- HER daughter to live with out her mother and in constant fear.

[scribd id=43805172 key=key-18j7hcjx5kgmiopq3ylk mode=list]

2000 July 31-- Custody Switch-Judge Richard Anderson Gives FULL custody to CRIMINAL HAL RICHARDSON

HAL RICHARDSON - COURT CRIMINAL RECORDS OF; VIOLENCE, BATTERY ON LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER, BATTERY AGAINST CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI, DRUGS, ALCOHOL, OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE, BAR FIGHTS ETC…

WHAT KIND A EVIL BASTARD WOULD HURT HIS CHILD SO BADLY BY TAKING HER MOTHER AWAY FROM HER? RIKKI DOMBROWSKI THE WORLD IS APPALLED, KANSAS IS SICK. THIS MAN WILL KNOW JUSTICE ONE DAY—GOD WILL JUDGE ALL WHO HELPED TO KEEP YOU SEPERATED FROM YOUR LOVING MOTHER.

GOD’S JUDGEMENT DAY—AND TOPEKA KANSAS WILL BURN

95LA014502-RICHARDSON,HAL,,1P
96D 000217-RICHARDSON,HAL,,1P
96D 000217-RICHARDSON,HAL,, (aka)1OR
96D 000217-RICHARDSON,HAL,, (aka)2OE
95D 000419-RICHARDSON,HAL,,1P
95D 000419-RICHARDSON,HAL,,1OR
97LA009121-RICHARDSON,HAL,,1D
98LA006122-RICHARDSON,HAL,,1D
92CV000432-RICHARDSON,HAL,,1P
96CV000937-RICHARDSON,HAL,,1P
92LA000089-RICHARDSON,HAL,,1D
96LA012692-RICHARDSON,HAL,,1D
97LA017898-RICHARDSON,HAL,,1D
97U 000055-RICHARDSON,HAL,,D/B/A/ TOPEKA VINYL TOP,1D
90LA007629-RICHARDSON,HAL,,DBA GATEWAY FUNDRAISING,1D
97LA018158-RICHARDSON,HAL,,DBA MINUTEMAN SOLAR FILM,1D
96LA003402-RICHARDSON,HAL,,DBA TOPEKA VINYL TOP CENTER,1D
98U 000141-RICHARDSON,HAL,,DBA TOPEKA VINYL TOP CENTER,1D
04SC000200-RICHARDSON,HAL,,III,1D
03C 000086-RICHARDSON,HAL,,JR TRACT 84,184D
95U 000500-RICHARDSON,HAL,,JR,1D
03L 010117-RICHARDSON,HAL,,JR,1D
05L 001833-RICHARDSON,HAL,,JR,1D
95SC000448-RICHARDSON,HAL,,JR,1D
95LN000161-RICHARDSON,HAL,,JR,1OP
05C 001464-RICHARDSON,HAL,,JR,TRACT 76, (aka)133D
94SC000355-RICHARDSON,HAL,,OWNER OF MINUTEMAN SOLAR FILM,1D
89CR 01537-RICHARDSON,HAL,G,, (aka)1D
90CR 01308-RICHARDSON,HAL,G, (aka)1D
96LA019246-RICHARDSON,HAL,G,JR,1D
96LA000348-RICHARDSON,HAL,G,JR,1D
97CV000960-RICHARDSON,HAL,G,JR,1D
97LA011585-RICHARDSON,HAL,G,JR,2D
08SC000096-RICHARDSON,HAL,G,JR,1P
05C 001464-RICHARDSON,HAL,G,JR,TRACT 76, (aka)133D
96D 000217-RICHARDSON,HAL,GEORGE, (aka)1OR
96D 000217-RICHARDSON,HAL,GEORGE, (aka)2OE
97CV000778-RICHARDSON,HAL,GEORGE,JR,

2 p.

95cr 00836 dv against dombrowski conviction

7 p.

12-1-1997 Joan Hamilton DA Refuses to Prosecute Admitted CrowBar Assault

4 p.

1995 DV 95CR836 Mary Kelly PSI Not Good Candidate for RECOMMEND PRISON for Criminal conviction of CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI

4 p.

1995 DV 95CR836 Mary Kelly PSI Not Good Candiate for Probation_2

2 p.

1999_2nd ABP Heartland Consult an Tans Hal Richardson

3 p.

1996 Alternatives to Battering Per Domestic Violence Conviction against Claudine Dombroeski and Order of Probation Hal Richardson...

1 p.

1995 PSI Mary Kelly Recommends Prison for Hal Richardson as Conviction History of Violence past 15 years

5 p.

1995 ABP Records Hal Richardson CR Conviction of Domestic Violence to Claudine Dombrowski (HE WAS KICKED OUT!)

2 p.

1990 SARP Alcohol Drug TX Hal Richardson From Conviction on Battery of Law Enforcement Officer

2 p.

1995-Feb 21 D.A. Affidavit for Domestic Violence (Conviction) Case No. 94-CR...

3 p.

1997 Closed Camera Inspection of 30 Day Drug Alchohol Hal Richardson Aug_1

Rene Netherton’s Threats exposed at the Battered Mothers Custody Conference in Albany NY , 2011

2011-07-31T10:00:00.001-04:00

Video streaming by Ustream

http://www.ustream.tv/recorded/11918412

Rene watch through the 2nd presenter—you are famous!!

I am the Mother of Rikki Dombrowski. Sham in Shawnee County (Topeka, Kansas)

2011-07-29T11:27:00.001-04:00

(a forward from Claudine Dombrowski)

Sham in Shawnee County (Topeka, Kansas)

I am the Mother of Rikki Dombrowski. I am denied any contact with her by a 8x Criminally Convicted Batterer HAL RICHARDSON. She lives in hell with the 'perp'. I did NOT abandon you Rikki, I want to be with you. Don't give up baby. I love you!-xoxo, mom

I Love you Rikki Dombrowski- my daughter. Don’t Give up baby!

Two years ago my mother died- Rikki's granny. Her father would NOT let Rikki go to funeral.

I made this video for three generations that have and are enduring abuse by Hal Richardson. With the help of the local CourtWhores, M. Jill Dykes, Rene M. Netherton, Judge David Debenham, Don and Jason Hoffman

Rikki’s father had me found in contempt for the video- Sentence: 30 days in jail and $1500.00 fine, for posting it on line so that Rikki could see it.

To this day I do not know if she ever has. They say- they will not let me see my child because they do not want her to know how abusive her father is- "that's not in her best interest'.-- insanity huh? Nope. Family Court in Topeka, Kansas

Conduct Unbecoming for an attorney: Rene Netherton, Topeka Kansas- But this is nothing new. She Claims Claudine Dombrowski is DEAD. Does she know something we do not? Is she making yet another terroristic threat .. ? Is Claudine Really Dead? Did Rene Netherton kill her? ATTENTION LAW ENFORCEMENT AND FBI!!! Please investigate. Is Claudine DEAD?

2011-07-18T11:19:00.001-04:00

Which is why this blog exists- to expose the whores of the court. This one is an *oldie* (literally)

Click on the links for full WEBPAGE Screen Shots links- (which will show you and direct link to the source of the web screen pictures) -- of this renegade attorney Rene M. Netherton Attorney at Law Topeka, Kansas who is harassing a known battered mother, one to which she is a part of the conspiracy to commit deprivation of civil rights as formerly posted under the FBI- COLOR OF LAW

She rants and raves a lot - a lot. One would think that she should be removed as an just an embarrassment to the rest of the legal profession- even alone with just her booze in her office desk drawer-

Seems this attorney needs her anti psychotic drugs increased.

“Really Rene- is this what they teach in Law School?” - you are a disgrace to all Lawyers and you add creed to the the ‘lawyer jokes’ .

*Screen shots begin with her *currently* open profile then by most recent date of each blog.

Rene Netherton Blogger Profile

http://www.webpagescreenshot.info/img/12359-718201154704PM

http://www.webpagescreenshot.info/img/559707-718201155935PM

http://www.webpagescreenshot.info/img/701984-718201155523PM

http://www.webpagescreenshot.info/img/0727-718201154557PM

http://www.webpagescreenshot.info/img/638719-718201160126PM

http://www.webpagescreenshot.info/img/938459-718201160323PM

Color of Law Abuses

2011-07-18T10:32:00.001-04:00

Color of Law Abuses

Rene Netherton’s threats to Claudine Dombrowski to have Kick Start bar injure or kill, M. Jill Dykes physical assault to Claudine in Courthouse hallway, Chris Dykes (husband of ATTY M. Jill Dykes) Call to Claudine of threats to Claudine, Police Reports and complaints, Judge David Debenham, accepting known falsified and inaccurate ‘evidence’ to deny Claudine her basic civil rights. Extreme BIAS.

Including, but not limited to, right to ‘life’ and safety, Right to Due process. David Rodeheffer, Donald Hoffman, Jason Hoffman and others have all: CONSPIRED to commit DEPRIVATION of CIVIL RIGHTS under the COLOR OF LAW.

U.S. law enforcement officers and other officials like judges, prosecutors, and security guards have been given tremendous power by local, state, and federal government agencies—authority they must have to enforce the law and ensure justice in our country. These powers include the authority to detain and arrest suspects, to search and seize property, to bring criminal charges, to make rulings in court, and to use deadly force in certain situations.

Preventing abuse of this authority, however, is equally necessary to the health of our nation’s democracy. That’s why it’s a federal crime for anyone acting under “color of law” willfully to deprive or conspire to deprive a person of a right protected by the Constitution or U.S. law. “Color of law” simply means that the person is using authority given to him or her by a local, state, or federal government agency.

The FBI is the lead federal agency for investigating color of law abuses, which include acts carried out by government officials operating both within and beyond the limits of their lawful authority. Off-duty conduct may be covered if the perpetrator asserted his or her official status in some way.

During 2009, the FBI investigated 385 color of law cases. Most of these crimes fall into five broad areas:

Excessive force;
Sexual assaults;
False arrest and fabrication of evidence;
Deprivation of property; and
Failure to keep from harm.

Excessive force: In making arrests, maintaining order, and defending life, law enforcement officers are allowed to use whatever force is "reasonably" necessary. The breadth and scope of the use of force is vast—from just the physical presence of the officer…to the use of deadly force. Violations of federal law occur when it can be shown that the force used was willfully "unreasonable" or "excessive."

Sexual assaults by officials acting under color of law can happen in jails, during traffic stops, or in other settings where officials might use their position of authority to coerce an individual into sexual compliance. The compliance is generally gained because of a threat of an official action against the person if he or she doesn’t comply.

False arrest and fabrication of evidence: The Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution guarantees the right against unreasonable searches or seizures. A law enforcement official using authority provided under the color of law is allowed to stop individuals and, under certain circumstances, to search them and retain their property. It is in the abuse of that discretionary power—such as an unlawful detention or illegal confiscation of property—that a violation of a person's civil rights may occur.

Fabricating evidence against or falsely arresting an individual also violates the color of law statute, taking away the person’s rights of due process and unreasonable seizure. In the case of deprivation of property, the color of law statute would be violated by unlawfully obtaining or maintaining a person’s property, which oversteps or misapplies the official’s authority.

The Fourteenth Amendment secures the right to due process; the Eighth Amendment prohibits the use of cruel and unusual punishment. During an arrest or detention, these rights can be violated by the use of force amounting to punishment (summary judgment). The person accused of a crime must be allowed the opportunity to have a trial and should not be subjected to punishment without having been afforded the opportunity of the legal process.

Failure to keep from harm: The public counts on its law enforcement officials to protect local communities. If it’s shown that an official willfully failed to keep an individual from harm, that official could be in violation of the color of law statute.

When Abusers FORCE their Victims to Marry them Like HAL RICHARDSON forced Claudine Dombrowski.

2011-07-18T09:03:00.001-04:00

(This is a Forward from Claudine Dombrowski.)

The author(s) of this blog felt it relevant to post on the ‘hell’ blogs of Shawnee County, Kansas OUTRAGE Case. A Case that NEVER should have happened, but due to the FOC’s GAL’s MHP’s and other cronyism and collusion of Court Officers for PROFIT only- another battered mother,lost custody to the abuser and RIKKI DOMBROWSKI was forced to grow up in ‘hell’ without her mommy. Its monetary. ITS ALL ABOUT THE MONEY.

That is CHILD TRAFFICKING by very definition. Look it up Rene Netherton. M. Jill Dykes, David C Rodeheffer, Judge David Debenham, Donal Hoffman, Jason Hoffman, Kara Haney, Safe Visit, Odyssey et el, and of course DADDY DEAEREST--You are all a part of the ‘conspiracy’ of Color of Law- when 3 or more people conspire to deprive one of their civil and human rights.As you did to this mother.

From: Claudine Dombrowski

This happened to me.

My daughter Rikki was 10 months old before we were married. Hal Richardson was on probation for 95 DV conviction 8 mos prior (part of which entailed NO CONTACT w Victim).

When all other coercion did not work--He took my infant daughter from her from daycare, to the Indian reservation.

The Topeka, Kansas local authorities (and FBI) would not go get my daughter, said it was treaties or such. No one, even w restraining order, and probation requirements and conviction in hand-- would get my daughter back to me.

Our captor and Abuser: HAL RICHARDSON said if I ever wanted to see my child again, I would marry him (he was smart enough to do it in another STATE - MO. as he was on probation in KS for crimes against myself).

Eventually after no 'authority' would help me, I did marry him, got my daughter back 3 days later, I left him two days after that and never went back.

That was in October 1995.

In 2005,while in hiding in MO. for my safety from this ‘batterer’. I found the State and county were we were married, and had it annulled as a 'shot gun' marriage. (although I was by this time divorced and still in custody litigation w abuser in Kansas) it was a self principled matter by this time. In the last few years we brought this up in court that we were ‘never married’ and still this control freak was open mouthed that his ‘ownership’ was annulled.

I am glad they arrested this bully. There is always ‘coercive control’ going on when women 'go back' or 'marry' the perp they have restraining order on.

Man arrested for trying to marry woman with a restraining order against him

What Litigation Abuse Looks Like! It Boggles The Mind That Each Line Represents a Trip to Court.

2011-07-17T11:17:00.001-04:00

What Litigation Abuse Looks Like! It Boggles The Mind That Each Line Represents a Trip to Court. This is a KANSAS CASE! The Claudine Dombrowski Case.

Dear Judge David Debenham, Rene M. Netherton, M. Jill Dykes, David C Rodeheffer and other Co Conspirators in this case. Donald Hoffman, Halleck G. Richardson et el.
Scroll down, your attempts at Shawnee County Sherriff Records have been destroyed. Guess your lies are getting old, to even the corrupt Sherriff Dept. usually they will trump up anything- Especially to protect their ‘drug snitch’ Hal Richardson.

Claudine Dombrowski Photos of Abuse | Stop Family Violence There is a crisis in our nation’s family courts. Judges are awarding child custody to abusers and pedophiles and punishing the safe parent who tries to … As you view these photos keep in mind that the court awarded FULL CUSTODY of their daughter to the “man” who did this to Claudine.

To read Claudine’s history that was submitted to the IACHR, click here If you want to know some of the many reasons women stay in abusive relationships, click here
www.stopfamilyviolence.org/pages/308

200 SE 7th Street, Topeka, KS 66603, (785) 233-8200

http://www.shawneecourt.org/doe/search.jsp?caseNumber=96D+000217&location

Case Number: 96D 000217

Div 13 – Hon. David B. Debenham . . .Ext. 4203

Petitioner:	RICHARDSON,HAL,,	Attorney:	HOFFMAN,DONALD,R,
Respondent:	DOMBROWSKI,CLAUDINE,,	Attorney:	DUNCAN,ROBERT,E,II,

Division:	13
Next Activity:	H on 05/26/2010 at 1:30 PM

03/04/1996	-	Petition filed on 03/04/96
03/04/1996	-	Praecipe for Summons filed by DONALD R HOFFMAN. #1 Motion for Ex-Parte Interlocutory Orders filed by DONALD R HOFFMAN for HAL RICHARDSON
03/04/1996	-	Summons issued personal service as to CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI issued to special process server.
03/04/1996	-	$61.50 recd from HOFFMAN,DONALD,R, (61.50 DM Docket Fee)
03/04/1996	-	Temporary Restraining Order filed. – TRC
03/05/1996	-	Summons returned, personal service – as to CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI 03/04/96 .
03/07/1996	-	SET – Motion Hearing on 04/02/96 at 10:30AM. in division 01.
03/07/1996	-	#2 Motion filed and entered by ALAN F ALDERSON for TEMPORARY MAINTENANCE AND CHILD SUPPORT. #3 Motion filed and entered by ALAN F ALDERSON for TEMPORARY CUSTODY
03/07/1996	-	Answer filed. Answering DEFENDANT CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI. Answering attorney ALAN F ALDERSON. Worksheet T – Temporary Maintenance RESPONDENT’S Child Support Worksheet as of 3/4/96.
03/07/1996	-	DOMESTIC RELATIONS AFFIDAVIT OF RESPONDANT
03/19/1996	-	Domestic Relations Affidavit OF HAL RICHARDSON.
03/19/1996	-	Petitioner’s Response to Respondent’s Application for Temporary Maintenance and Child Support filed by DONALD R HOFFMAN.
03/25/1996	-	NOTICE OF SERVICE OF DISCOVERY REQUESTS FILED BY ALAN ALDERSON.
03/27/1996	-	AFFIDAVIT IN CONTEMPT FILED. ACCUSATION IN CONTEMPT & MOTION TO SEVER CONTACT & REQUIRE THERAPY FILED BY ALAN ALDERSON.
04/02/1996	-	Petitioner appears in person and by D.Hoffman. Respondent appears in person and by A.Alderson. Mr. Hoffman says temporary custody is not disputed, although visitation schedule is being worked on. Order of Conciliation signed. Motions continued re: temporary support and accusation in contempt for agreed order or to be reset upon request of parties. JWL
04/02/1996	-	ORDER FOR CONCILIATION – JWL
04/02/1996	-	Notice of service of Discovery filed by DONALD R HOFFMAN
04/30/1996	-	### MOTION FILED BY ALAN F ALDERSON TO WITHDRAW AS COUNSEL OF RECORD FOR RESPONDANT
05/01/1996	-	ENTRY OF APPEARANCE FILED BY NANCY E FREUND ON BEHALF OF CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI.
05/09/1996	-	SET – Motion Hearing on 06/06/96 at 11:00AM. in division 01.
05/10/1996	-	Order for withdrawal of attorney ALAN F ALDERSON filed. – JWL
05/10/1996	-	#4 Motion filed and entered by NANCY E FREUND for CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI FOR AUTHORIZATION TO MOVE.
05/17/1996	-	EMERGENCY CONFERENCE AT THE REQUEST OF MR. HOFFMAN. Re- porter, Martha Young. Petitioner appears by Donald Hoffman. Respondent appears by Nancy Freund. Sheri Keller for Court Services. Telephone conference with Bernie Nobo, MSW, and all parties. Determined Respondent’s move would not be physical jeopardizing to minor. Court Services to work on exchange for visitation (child is 17 months old). Other terms on the record. Nancy Freund to prepare journal entry. Case continued to 6/6/96. JWL
05/21/1996	-	#5 Motion filed and entered by DONALD R HOFFMAN for HAL RICHARDSON FOR CHANGE OF TEMPORARY AND PERMANENT RESIDENTIAL CUSTODY.
05/28/1996	-	RESPONSE TO MOTION FOR CHANGE OF TEMPORARY AND PERMANENT RESIDENTIAL CUSTODY FILED BY NANCY E FREUND.
06/04/1996	-	Per phone call from Shirley in Don Hoffman’s office, and verified with Julie in Nancy Freund’s office, case to be taken off docket until reports from Dr. Maxfield are re- ceived. Cancel 6/6/96 hearing. DBC
06/05/1996	-	### MOTION FILED BY NANCY E FREUND TO WITHDRAW AS COUNSEL OF RECORD FOR RESPONDANT
06/07/1996	-	ENTRY OF APPEARANCE FILED BY JOHN J AMBROSIO ON BEHALF OF CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI.
06/17/1996	-	ORDER FILED BY NANCY E. FREUND JWL
06/17/1996	-	Order for withdrawal of attorney NANCY E. FREUND filed. – JWL
07/02/1996	-	SET – Status Docket on 09/04/96 at 09:00AM. in division 01.
07/02/1996	-	Notice sent.
07/24/1996	-	Notice of service of Discovery filed by DONALD R HOFFMAN
08/28/1996	-	#6 Motion filed and entered by JOHN J AMBROSIO for CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI TO SET CHILD SUPPORT. Filmed 08/29/96.
09/04/1996	-	RESPONSE TO PETITIONERS REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS FILED BY JOHN J. AMBROSIO.
09/04/1996	-	SET – Status Docket on 10/02/96 at 09:00AM. in division 01.
09/04/1996	-	Notice sent.
09/04/1996	-	STATUS: Petitioner appears by Donald Hoffman. Respondent appears by John Ambrosio. Case continued to 10/2/96 status docket, 9:00am, awaiting a report from Dr. Maxwell. LGK/pro tem
09/09/1996	-	DOMESTIC RELATIONS AFFIDAVIT OF RESPONDANT Filmed 09/10/96.
09/11/1996	-	SET – Pre-trial on 10/23/96 at 03:15PM. in division 01.
09/11/1996	-	Notice sent.
10/18/1996	-	AMENDED DOMESTIC RELATIONS AFFIDAVIT OF PETITIONER
10/22/1996	-	PROPOSED PRETRIAL ORDER FILED BY DONALD R. HOFFMAN. Filmed 10/23/96.
10/23/1996	-	SUMMONS AND CONTINUANCE NOTICE FILED BY DIST. COURT TRUSTEE
10/24/1996	-	PROPOSED PRETRIAL ORDER FILED BY JOHN J. AMBROSIO.
11/01/1996	-	SET – Status Docket on 12/04/96 at 09:00AM. in division 01.
11/01/1996	-	Notice sent.
11/04/1996	-	Phone conference with John Ambrosio with Don Hoffman in chambers. Scott McKenzie to be appointed GAL with $250.00 from each party up front, within 20 days. Court to prepare order. JWL
11/05/1996	-	PRETRIAL ORDER. JWL
11/05/1996	-	LETTER TO MR. HOFFMAN AND MR. AMBROSIO FROM JUDGE LEUENBERGER REGARDING THE PRETRIAL ORDER.
11/06/1996	-	ORDER APPOINTING GUARDIAN AD LITEM, SCOTT MCKENZIE, – JWL
11/12/1996	-	SET – Court Trial on 01/30/97 at 01:45PM. in division 01.
11/12/1996	-	Notice sent.
11/14/1996	-	Praecipe for Subpoena/Subpoena Duces Tecum filed by DONALD R HOFFMAN.
11/15/1996	-	Subpoena Duces Tecum issued certified mail returnable 12/13/96 05:00P.M. as to JOHN FIORE-CHIEF SECURITY issued to special process server. Requested by DONALD R HOFFMAN
01/02/1997	-	Affidavit of Business Records from JOHN FIORE-CHIEF SECURITY filed. Business Records received. DONALD R HOFFMAN notified. Filmed 01/06/97.
01/06/1997	-	MOTION FOR LEAVE TO WITHDRAW AND NOTICE OF INTENT TO WITHDRAW FILED BY SCOTT D. MCKINZIE. (FOR GAL)
01/07/1997	-	ORDER TO RELEASE BUSINESS RECORDS PRODUCED BY SOUTHWESTERN BELL TO DONALD R HOFFMAN – JWL
01/14/1997	-	Praecipe for Subpoena/Subpoena Duces Tecum filed by DONALD R HOFFMAN.(JOHN FIORE) Praecipe for Subpoena/Subpoena Duces Tecum filed by DONALD R HOFFMAN.(LARNED STATE HOSPITAL)
01/15/1997	-	Subpoena Duces Tecum issued personal service returnable 01/23/97 05:00P.M. as to JOHN FIORE-CHIEF SECURITY issued to special process server. Requested by DONALD R HOFFMAN
01/15/1997	-	Subpoena Duces Tecum issued personal service returnable 01/21/97 05:00P.M. as to LARNED STATE HOSPITAL issued to special process server. Requested by DONALD R HOFFMAN
01/15/1997	-	Subpoena returned, residence service , left with Agent/Officer – as to JOHN FIORE-CHIEF SECURITY 01/10/97 .
01/16/1997	-	Praecipe for Subpoena/Subpoena Duces Tecum filed by DONALD R HOFFMAN. (8 SUBPOENAS)
01/16/1997	-	Subpoena Duces Tecum issued personal service returnable 01/30/97 01:45P.M. as to OFFICER BRAD METZ issued to special process server. $15.80 Witness fee. Requested by DONALD R HOFFMAN
01/16/1997	-	Subpoena Duces Tecum issued personal service returnable 01/30/97 01:45P.M. as to BERNARD NOBO MSW issued to special process server. $15.80 Witness fee. Requested by DONALD R HOFFMAN
01/16/1997	-	Subpoena Duces Tecum issued personal service returnable 01/30/97 01:45P.M. as to RICHARD MAXFIELD PHD issued to special process server. $15.80 Witness fee. Requested by DONALD R HOFFMAN
01/16/1997	-	Subpoena issued personal service returnable 01/30/97 01:45P.M. as to ED KABERLINE issued to special process server. $15.80 Witness fee. Requested by DONALD R HOFFMAN
01/16/1997	-	Subpoena issued personal service returnable 01/30/97 01:45P.M. as to MRS ED KABERLINE issued to special process server. $10.00 Witness fee. Requested by DONALD R HOFFMAN
01/16/1997	-	Subpoena issued personal service returnable 01/30/97 01:45P.M. as to BRENDA DIVER issued to special process server. $10.00 Witness fee. Requested by DONALD R HOFFMAN
01/16/1997	-	Subpoena issued personal service returnable 01/30/97 01:45P.M. as to BRENDA DIVER issued to special process server. $15.80 Witness fee. Requested by DONALD R HOFFMAN
01/16/1997	-	Subpoena Duces Tecum issued personal service returnable 01/30/97 01:45P.M. as to SHERRI KELLER issued to special process server. Requested by DONALD R HOFFMAN
01/16/1997	-	Subpoena Duces Tecum issued personal service returnable 01/24/97 05:00P.M. as to STATE OF KANSAS DEPT. OF HUMAN RESOURCES issued to special process server. Requested by DONALD R HOFFMAN
01/17/1997	-	Order for withdrawal of attorney, SCOTT MCKENZIE, filed. – JWL
01/17/1997	-	Subpoena Duces Tecum issued personal service returnable 01/27/97 05:00P.M. as to JOHN FIORE-CHIEF SECURITY issued to special process server. Requested by DONALD R HOFFMAN
01/17/1997	-	WITNESS AND EXHIBIT LIST FILED BY DONALD R HOFFMAN. Filmed 01/21/97.
01/21/1997	-	Praecipe for Subpoena/Subpoena Duces Tecum filed by DONALD R HOFFMAN.
01/21/1997	-	Subpoena returned, personal service – as to BRENDA DIVER 01/20/97 .
01/21/1997	-	Subpoena duces tecum returned, residence service , left with Agent/Officer – as to SHERRI KELLER 01/17/97 .
01/21/1997	-	Subpoena duces tecum returned, residence service , left with Agent/Officer – as to OFFICER BRAD METZ 01/17/97 .
01/21/1997	-	Subpoena duces tecum returned, residence service , left with Agent/Officer – as to RICHARD MAXFIELD PHD 01/17/97 .
01/21/1997	-	Subpoena returned, personal service – as to STATE OF KANSAS DEPT. OF HUMAN RESOURCES 01/17/97 .
01/21/1997	-	Subpoena duces tecum returned, residence service – as to BERNARD NOBO MSW 01/17/97 .
01/21/1997	-	Subpoena returned, personal service – as to MRS ED KABERLINE 01/18/97 .
01/21/1997	-	Subpoena returned, personal service – as to ED KABERLINE 01/18/97 .
01/21/1997	-	WITNESS AND EXHIBIT LIST FILED BY JOHN J AMBROSIO. Filmed 01/22/97.
01/22/1997	-	#7 Motion filed and entered by MERRILL J BEFORT HICKLIN for STATE OF KANSAS DEPT. OF HUMAN RESOURCES FOR COMBINED MOTION AND MEMORANDUM TO QUASH SUBPOENA AND REQUEST FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER.
01/29/1997	-	#8 Motion filed and entered by DONALD R HOFFMAN for HAL RICHARDSON TO ESTABLISH REASONABLE VISITATION SCHEDULE PENDING TRIAL.
01/30/1997	-	SET – Court Trial on 04/17/97 at 01:45PM. in division 01.
01/30/1997	-	Notice sent.
01/30/1997	-	SET – Motion Hearing on 02/21/97 at 10:30AM. in division 01.
01/30/1997	-	Notice sent.
01/30/1997	-	Scheduling Conference: Chamber conference with Donald Hoffman, John Ambrosio, and Scott McKenzie, GAL. Case continued to 4/17/97 at 1:45pm. Court to call Maxfield’s office for written report, if any available notify attorneys Parties to work out interim visitation. Motion for visitation continued to 2/21/97. Motion of SRS moot, they should prepare order, court to call. JWL
02/04/1997	-	MOTION TO WITHDRAW FILED BY MERRILL J. HICKLIN BEFORT, ATTORNEY FOR THE KANSAS DEPT OF HUMAN RESOURCES. Filmed 02/05/97.
02/07/1997	-	AGREED ORDER. JWL
02/11/1997	-	Call from Kathy in Ambrosio’s office. Said based on fax from Hoffman’s office, visitation issue settled by agreed order and no need for 2/21/97 hearing. DBC
02/13/1997	-	AGREED ORDER FILED – JWL
02/21/1997	-	Subpoena returned, residence service , left with Agent/Officer – as to LARNED STATE HOSPITAL 02/14/97 .
02/25/1997	-	Affidavit of Business Records from LARNED STATE HOSPITAL filed. Business Records received. DONALD R HOFFMAN notified.
02/26/1997	-	Subpoena recalled – as to JOHN FIORE-CHIEF SECURITY 02/26/97
02/26/1997	-	Praecipe for Subpoena/Subpoena Duces Tecum filed by DONALD R HOFFMAN.
02/26/1997	-	Subpoena Duces Tecum issued personal service returnable 03/20/97 05:00P.M. as to JOHN FIORE-CHIEF SECURITY issued to special process server. Requested by DONALD R HOFFMAN
03/07/1997	-	Affidavit of Business Records from JOHN FIORE-CHIEF SECURITY filed. Business Records received. DONALD R HOFFMAN notified.
03/10/1997	-	Affidavit of Business Records from JOHN FIORE-CHIEF SECURITY filed. Business Records received. DONALD R HOFFMAN notified.
03/11/1997	-	ORDER TO RELEASE BUSINESS RECORDS PRODUCED BY JOHN FIORE-CHIEF SECURITY TO DONALD R HOFFMAN – JWL
03/14/1997	-	Subpoena returned, personal service FAX AS PER JOHN FIORE INSTRUCTIONS as to JOHN FIORE-CHIEF SECURITY 02/28/97 Filmed 03/17/97.
04/01/1997	-	Praecipe for Subpoena/Subpoena Duces Tecum filed by DONALD R HOFFMAN.(5 PRAECIPES)
04/01/1997	-	Subpoena Duces Tecum issued personal service returnable 04/17/97 01:45P.M. as to OFFICER BRAD METZ issued to special process server. Requested by DONALD R HOFFMAN
04/01/1997	-	Subpoena Duces Tecum issued personal service returnable 04/17/97 01:45P.M. as to BERNARD NOBO MSW issued to special process server. Requested by DONALD R HOFFMAN
04/01/1997	-	Subpoena Duces Tecum issued personal service returnable 04/17/97 01:45P.M. as to RICHARD MAXFIELD PHD issued to special process server. Requested by DONALD R HOFFMAN
04/01/1997	-	Subpoena Duces Tecum issued personal service returnable 04/17/97 01:45P.M. as to SHERRI KELLER issued to special process server. Requested by DONALD R HOFFMAN
04/01/1997	-	Subpoena issued personal service returnable 04/17/97 01:45P.M. as to ED KABERLINE issued to special process server. Requested by DONALD R HOFFMAN
04/01/1997	-	Subpoena issued personal service returnable 04/17/97 01:45P.M. as to MRS ED KABERLINE issued to special process server. Requested by DONALD R HOFFMAN
04/03/1997	-	Subpoena returned, personal service – as to BERNARD NOBO MSW 04/02/97 .
04/03/1997	-	Subpoena returned, personal service – as to MRS ED KABERLINE 04/02/97 .
04/03/1997	-	Subpoena returned, personal service – as to ED KABERLINE 04/02/97 .
04/03/1997	-	Subpoena duces tecum returned, residence service , left with spouse – WITH HIS RECEPTIONIST – as to RICHARD MAXFIELD PHD 04/02/97 .
04/03/1997	-	Subpoena returned, personal service – as to OFFICER BRAD METZ 04/01/97 .
04/03/1997	-	Subpoena duces tecum returned, personal service – as to SHERRI KELLER 04/01/97 .
04/03/1997	-	Notice of Service for Discovery Requests Filed by Donald R. Hoffman. Amended Witness & Exhibit List Filed by Donald R. Hoffman.
04/15/1997	-	FACTUAL STATEMENT FILED BY DONALD R. HOFFMAN.
04/17/1997	-	FACTUAL STATEMENT FILED BY JOHN J. AMBROSIO.
04/17/1997	-	CT: Petitioner appears in person and by Donald Hoffman. Respondent appears in person and by John Ambrosio. GAL, Scott McKenzie, appears in person. Court conducts a final and brief pretrial conference in chambers with both parties and all counsel, on the record. Parties given an opportun- ity to confer. Parties announce an agreed settlement, as per j.e. Outline of agreement on the record by Petitioner’s counsel. Respondent and her attorney left prior to outline of settlement on the record. Petitioner offered jurisdic- tional and grounds evidence. Divorce granted on grounds of incompatibility subject to final j.e. GAL announced his bill. GAL to continue appointment subject to terms in j.e. Journal entry to be prepared within 10 working days. JWL
04/18/1997	-	### MOTION FILED BY DONALD R HOFFMAN TO WITHDRAW AS COUNSEL OF RECORD FOR RESPONDENT
04/18/1997	-	LETTER TO JOHN AMBROSIO FROM CLAUDINE M. DOMBROWSKI.
04/21/1997	-	REQUEST FOR HEARING FILED BY AINKA C. KWELI #9 Motion filed and entered by AINKA C KWELI for CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI TO CORRECT MINOR CHILD’S NAME IN ALL COURT DOCUMENTS #10 Motion filed and entered by AINKA C KWELI for CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI TO CHANGE COURT SERVICES OFFICER
04/21/1997	-	#11 Motion filed and entered by AINKA C KWELI for CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI FOR A RESTRAINING ORDER #12 Motion filed and entered by AINKA C KWELI for CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI TO APPOINT GUARDIAN AD LITEM #13 Motion filed and entered by AINKA C KWELI for CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI FOR TEMPORARY CHILD SUPPORT
04/21/1997	-	#14 Motion filed and entered by AINKA C KWELI for CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI FOR TEMPORARY CUSTODY #15 Motion filed and entered by AINKA C KWELI for CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI FOR STAY OF JUDGMENT OF CUSTODY OF MINOR CHILD #16 Motion filed and entered by AINKA C KWELI for CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI TO SET ASIDE JUDGMENT AS TO RELOCATION AS TO RESPONDENT AND MINOR CHILD
04/21/1997	-	#17 Motion filed and entered by AINKA C KWELI for CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI TO SET ASIDE JUDGMENT PURPORTING TO DETERMINE CUSTODY OF MINOR CHILD OF NATIVE AMERICAN HERITAGE #18 Motion filed and entered by AINKA C KWELI for CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI FOR STAY OF JUDGMENT OF CUSTODY OF MINOR CHILD
04/23/1997	-	SET – Hearing on 05/19/97 at 08:45AM. in division 01.
04/23/1997	-	Notice sent.
05/09/1997	-	#20 Motion filed and entered by AINKA C KWELI for CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI FOR CONTINUANCE Filmed 05/12/97.
05/09/1997	-	#21 Motion filed and entered by DONALD R HOFFMAN for HAL RICHARDSON FOR AN ORDER ENFORCING PETITIONER’S VISITATION AND SHARED CUSTODY OF MINOR CHILD Filmed 05/12/97.
05/19/1997	-	#22 Motion filed and entered by SCOTT D MCKENZIE FOR ORDER OF PROTECTIVE CUSTODY
05/19/1997	-	#23 Motion filed and entered by DONALD R HOFFMAN for HAL RICHARDSON FOR ORDER DIRECTING MINOR CHILD OF PARTIES BE RETURNED TO PETITIONER PENDING TRAIL OF INSTANT CASE
05/19/1997	-	SET – Motion Hearing on 06/12/97 at 10:30AM. in division 01.
05/19/1997	-	GAL, Scott McKenzie, appears in person. Court Services appears by Sheri Keller. Petitioner appears in person and by Donald Hoffman. Respondent appears not but by John Ambrosio and Mike Broemmel for Anika Kweli. John Ambrosio’s motion to withdraw sustained. Scheduling conference: all motions set for 1 1/2 hours on 6/16/97. Respondent to file any matters in support by 5/29/97. Petitioner has until 6/9/97 to reply. GAL reply thereafter. Supporting affidavit for allegation of Indian Child motion. Trial set for 9/16/97 at 9:00am, full day. GAL has emergency motion set for 5/20/97 at 1:30pm. Visitation issue and Respondent not present for scheduling conference. JWL
05/20/1997	-	H: Petitioner appears in person and by Don Hoffman. Respondent and minor child appears in person and Respondent by Anika Kweli. GAL, Scott McKenzie, appears in person. Evidence and motion heard. Ruling as per record. Motion denied, but temporary visitation modified. Order to be forwarded by 5/22/97. JWL
05/21/1997	-	SET – Hearing on 06/16/97 at 10:30AM. in division 01.
05/21/1997	-	Notice sent.
05/21/1997	-	SET – Court Trial on 09/16/97 at 09:00AM. in division 01.
05/21/1997	-	Notice sent.
05/22/1997	-	Order for withdrawal of attorney, JOHN J AMBROSIO, filed. – JWL
05/22/1997	-	SET – Motion Hearing on 06/26/97 at 09:30AM. in division 01.
05/22/1997	-	#24 Motion filed and entered by DONALD R HOFFMAN for HAL RICHARDSON FOR ATTORNEY FEES
05/28/1997	-	Call to Mr. Hoffman’s office, okay to sign Temporary Child Custody and Support Orders, a copy was faxed to him pre- viously. DBC
05/28/1997	-	Temporary Custody and Support Orders filed by AINKA C KWELI. CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI to pay $119.00 beginning 05/20/97. – JWL
05/29/1997	-	#25 Motion filed and entered by SCOTT D MCKENZIE FOR ASSESSMENT OF GUARDIAN AD LITEM FEES
05/29/1997	-	### MOTION FILED BY SCOTT D MCKENZIE TO WITHDRAW AS COUNSEL OF RECORD FOR GUARDIAN AD LITEM
05/29/1997	-	#26 Motion filed and entered by AINKA C KWELI for CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI TO CLARIFY PRE-TRIAL ORDER
05/29/1997	-	#27 Motion filed and entered by AINKA C KWELI for CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI FOR CITATION IN CONTEMPT
06/02/1997	-	Order for withdrawal of attorney, SCOTT D MCKENZIE, filed. – JWL
06/03/1997	-	TRANSCRIPT OF MOTION FOR ORDER OF PROTECTIVE CUSTODY BEFORE JUDGE LEUENBERGER 05/20/97
06/16/1997	-	$120.00 Cash recd from RICHARDSON,HAL,, (120.00 DM Payment)
06/16/1997	-	SCHEDULING CONFERENCE: Petitioner appears in person and by Don Hoffman. Respondent appears in person and by Ainka Kweli. Scott McKenzie, former GAL, appears in person. Motions filed since 5/20/97: Petitioner’s Motion for attorneys fees, GAL’s motion for attorneys fees, Respondent motion to clarify pretrial order, Respondent’s Motion for Citation in Contempt. GAL fees allowed, divided one-half to each party. Other motions under advisement. JWL
06/17/1997	-	AMENDED TEMPORARY CHILD CUSTODY AND SUPPORT ORDERS FILED BY AINKA C. KWELI. JWL
06/23/1997	-	Inter Office Memo
06/24/1997	-	PAY OUT 120.00 ON 96D217 PER OBLIGATION LOADED PER IOM 6/23/97
06/25/1997	-	LETTER DECISION FILED. JWL (CONCERNING ATTY.FEES) Filmed 06/27/97.
07/07/1997	-	JOURNAL ENTRY FILED BY SCOTT D.MCKENZIE. JWL (CONCERNING ASSESSMENT OF GUARDIAN AD LITEM FEES) Filmed 07/08/97.
08/15/1997	-	Praecipe for Subpoena/Subpoena Duces Tecum filed by AINKA C KWELI. (NINE PRAECIPES) Filmed 08/18/97.
08/18/1997	-	Subpoena Duces Tecum issued certified mail returnable 08/27/97 05:00P.M. as to JENNY SHAW Requested by AINKA C KWELI
08/18/1997	-	Subpoena Duces Tecum issued certified mail returnable 08/27/97 05:00P.M. as to SHERRI KELLER Requested by AINKA C KWELI
08/18/1997	-	Subpoena Duces Tecum issued certified mail returnable 08/27/97 05:00P.M. as to SHAWNEE CO SHERIFF’S DEPT Requested by AINKA C KWELI
08/18/1997	-	Subpoena Duces Tecum issued certified mail returnable 08/27/97 05:00P.M. as to SCOTT D MCKENZIE Requested by AINKA C KWELI
08/18/1997	-	Subpoena Duces Tecum issued certified mail returnable 08/27/97 05:00P.M. as to ATT CORPORATION Requested by AINKA C KWELI
08/18/1997	-	Subpoena Duces Tecum issued certified mail returnable 08/27/97 05:00P.M. as to SHAWNEE CO SHERIFF’S DEPT Requested by AINKA C KWELI
08/18/1997	-	Subpoena Duces Tecum issued certified mail returnable 08/27/97 05:00P.M. as to TOPEKA POLICE DEPARTMENT Requested by AINKA C KWELI
08/18/1997	-	Subpoena Duces Tecum issued certified mail returnable 08/27/97 05:00P.M. as to TOPEKA POLICE DEPARTMENT Requested by AINKA C KWELI
08/18/1997	-	Subpoena Duces Tecum issued certified mail returnable 08/27/97 05:00P.M. as to BATTERED WOMANS TASK FORCE Requested by AINKA C KWELI
08/20/1997	-	Transcript of HEARING, held 061697 filed.
08/25/1997	-	Subpoena sent certified mail delivered , signed by non-addressee – as to JENNY SHAW certified mail #P755979344 08/21/97 .
08/25/1997	-	Subpoena returned, residence service , left with Agent/Officer – Received by: SECRETARY – as to SHERRI KELLER 08/21/97 .
08/25/1997	-	Subpoena sent certified mail delivered , certified mail – as to ATT CORPORATION certified mail #P755979347 08/21/97 .
08/25/1997	-	Subpoena sent certified mail delivered , certified mail – as to TOPEKA POLICE DEPARTMENT certified mail #P755979349 08/21/97 .
08/25/1997	-	Subpoena sent certified mail delivered , certified mail – as to TOPEKA POLICE DEPARTMENT certified mail #P755979350 08/21/97 .
08/25/1997	-	Subpoena sent certified mail delivered , certified mail – as to BATTERED WOMANS TASK FORCE certified mail #P755979351 08/21/97 .
08/25/1997	-	Transcript of HEARING, held 040297 filed. Filmed 08/26/97.
08/26/1997	-	Affidavit of Business Records from JENNY SHAW filed. Business Records received. AINKA C KWELI notified.
08/27/1997	-	Subpoena returned, residence service , left with resident agent – Received by: SGT. THOMPSON – as to SHAWNEE CO SHERIFF’S DEPT 08/25/97 .
08/27/1997	-	Subpoena returned, residence service , left with resident agent – Received by: SGT. THOMPSON – as to SHAWNEE CO SHERIFF’S DEPT 08/25/97 .
08/27/1997	-	Affidavit of Business Records from SHERRI KELLER filed. Business Records received. AINKA C KWELI notified.
08/27/1997	-	LETTER FROM SHAWNEE COUNTY SHERIFF’S DEPT REGARDING OBJECTION TO TWO SUBPOENA’S FOR BUSINESS RECORDS.
08/29/1997	-	AFFIDAVIT SIGNED BY SCOTT D MCKENZIE
08/29/1997	-	#28 Motion filed and entered by AINKA C KWELI for CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI FOR CITATION IN CONTEMPT.
08/29/1997	-	#29 Motion filed and entered by AINKA C KWELI for CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI CITATION IN CONTEMPT. #30 Motion filed and entered by AINKA C KWELI for CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI CITATION IN CONTEMPT.
08/29/1997	-	Praecipe for Subpoena/Subpoena Duces Tecum filed by AINKA C KWELI. Filmed 09/02/97.
09/02/1997	-	Subpoena Duces Tecum issued certified mail returnable 09/05/97 05:00P.M. as to S.A.R.P Requested by AINKA C KWELI
09/02/1997	-	SET – Court Trial on 09/18/97 at 01:30PM. in division 12.
09/02/1997	-	Notice sent.
09/02/1997	-	Upon motion of Respondent to recuse, Judge Leuenberger recuses and case is transferred to Div 12. Administrative Assistant called both attorneys to advise trial changed to 9/18/97 and 9/19/97 beginning at 1:30 p.m. both days, from 9/16/97. JWL
09/02/1997	-	Reassigned to division 12 from division 1. OJA reason for transfer 2.
09/02/1997	-	Affidavit of Business Records from BATTERED WOMANS TASK FORCE filed. Business Records received. AINKA C KWELI notified. Filmed 09/09/97.
09/03/1997	-	Subpoena sent certified mail delivered , signed by non-addressee – as to SCOTT D MCKENZIE certified mail #P755979346 08/28/97 .
09/03/1997	-	Affidavit of Business Records from ATT CORPORATION filed. Business Records received. AINKA C KWELI notified. Filmed 09/09/97.
09/04/1997	-	Praecipe for Subpoena/Subpoena Duces Tecum filed by DONALD R HOFFMAN. (5 PRAECIPES FILED)
09/04/1997	-	Subpoena Duces Tecum issued certified mail returnable 09/18/97 01:30P.M. as to OFFICER BRAD METZ Requested by DONALD R HOFFMAN
09/04/1997	-	Subpoena Duces Tecum issued certified mail returnable 09/18/97 01:30P.M. as to BERNARD NOBO MSW Requested by DONALD R HOFFMAN
09/04/1997	-	Subpoena Duces Tecum issued certified mail returnable 09/18/97 01:30P.M. as to RICHARD MAXFIELD PHD Requested by DONALD R HOFFMAN
09/04/1997	-	Subpoena Duces Tecum issued certified mail returnable 09/18/97 01:30P.M. as to SHERRI KELLER Requested by DONALD R HOFFMAN
09/04/1997	-	Subpoena issued certified mail returnable 09/18/97 01:30P.M. as to SCOTT D MCKENZIE Requested by DONALD R HOFFMAN
09/05/1997	-	#31 Motion filed and entered by ROBERT E KEESHAN for SHAWNEE COMMUNITY MENTAL HEALTH CENTER TO STAY OR QUASH SUBPOENA.
09/08/1997	-	Subpoena sent certified mail delivered , certified mail – as to S.A.R.P certified mail #P755983645 09/04/97 .
09/08/1997	-	Filed by Fax AMENDED WITNESS AND EXHIBIT LIST FILED BY AINKA C KWELI.
09/08/1997	-	Praecipe for Subpoena/Subpoena Duces Tecum filed by DONALD R HOFFMAN.(4 SUBPOENA’S)
09/09/1997	-	Subpoena duces tecum returned, personal service – as to OFFICER BRAD METZ 09/05/97 .
09/09/1997	-	Subpoena issued personal service returnable 09/18/97 01:30P.M. as to ED KABERLINE issued to special process server. Requested by DONALD R HOFFMAN
09/09/1997	-	Subpoena issued personal service returnable 09/18/97 01:30P.M. as to MRS ED KABERLINE issued to special process server. Requested by DONALD R HOFFMAN
09/09/1997	-	Subpoena issued personal service returnable 09/18/97 01:30P.M. as to BRENDA DIVER issued to special process server. Requested by DONALD R HOFFMAN
09/09/1997	-	Subpoena Duces Tecum issued personal service returnable 09/18/97 01:30P.M. as to JENNY SHAW issued to special process server. $15.40 Witness fee. Requested by DONALD R HOFFMAN
09/09/1997	-	Subpoena Duces Tecum issued personal service returnable 09/18/97 01:30P.M. as to STEVEN E HARVEY issued to special process server. $17.15 Witness fee. Requested by DONALD R HOFFMAN
09/10/1997	-	Subpoena duces tecum sent certified mail delivered , signee unknown – as to BERNARD NOBO MSW certified mail #P755984919 09/08/97 .
09/10/1997	-	Affidavit of Business Records from TOPEKA POLICE DEPARTMENT filed. Business Records received. AINKA C KWELI notified.
09/10/1997	-	Subpoena returned, personal service – as to ED KABERLINE 09/09/97 .
09/10/1997	-	Subpoena returned, personal service – as to MRS ED KABERLINE 09/09/97 .
09/10/1997	-	Subpoena duces tecum returned, personal service – as to STEVEN E HARVEY 09/09/97 .
09/11/1997	-	Subpoena duces tecum sent certified mail delivered , signed by non-addressee – as to RICHARD MAXFIELD PHD certified mail #P755984921 09/09/97 .
09/11/1997	-	Subpoena duces tecum returned, residence service , left with resident agent – Received by: SEC. – as to SHERRI KELLER 09/09/97 .
09/11/1997	-	Subpoena sent certified mail delivered , signed by addressee – as to SCOTT D MCKENZIE certified mail #P755984924 09/08/97
09/11/1997	-	Subpoena duces tecum returned, personal service – as to JENNY SHAW 09/10/97 .
09/11/1997	-	Subpoena returned, personal service – as to BRENDA DIVER 09/10/97 .
09/15/1997	-	Praecipe for Subpoena/Subpoena Duces Tecum filed by DONALD R HOFFMAN.
09/15/1997	-	Subpoena Duces Tecum issued personal service returnable 09/18/97 01:30P.M. as to OFFICER BUTELL issued to special process server. $12.00 Witness fee. Requested by DONALD R HOFFMAN
09/16/1997	-	Praecipe for Subpoena/Subpoena Duces Tecum filed by AINKA C KWELI. (FOUR PRAECIPES)
09/16/1997	-	Subpoena Duces Tecum issued certified mail returnable 09/18/97 01:30P.M. as to DR GRACE MORRISON $215.00 Witness fee. Requested by AINKA C KWELI
09/16/1997	-	Subpoena Duces Tecum issued certified mail returnable 09/18/97 01:30P.M. as to GERI THOMPSON $15.00 Witness fee. Requested by AINKA C KWELI
09/16/1997	-	Subpoena Duces Tecum issued certified mail returnable 09/18/97 01:30P.M. as to MARY KELLY $15.00 Witness fee. Requested by AINKA C KWELI
09/16/1997	-	Subpoena Duces Tecum issued certified mail returnable 09/18/97 01:30P.M. as to HAL RICHARDSON III $15.00 Witness fee. Requested by AINKA C KWELI
09/16/1997	-	#32 Motion filed and entered by AINKA C KWELI for CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI IN LIMINE. Filed by Fax
09/16/1997	-	Subpoena duces tecum returned, residence service , left with resident agent – LEFT WITH SGT MILLER – as to OFFICER BUTELL 09/16/97 .
09/17/1997	-	AMENDED WITNESS AND EXHIBIT LIST FILED BY AINKA C KWELI
09/17/1997	-	FACTUAL STATEMENT FILED Filmed 09/18/97.
09/17/1997	-	FACTUAL STATEMENT FILED BY AINKA C KWELI Filmed 09/19/97.
09/18/1997	-	#33 Combined Motion filed and entered by AINKA C KWELI for CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI AND MEMORANDUM TO PRODUCE BUSINESS RECORDS AND RELEASE BUSINESS RECORDS. Filed by Fax
09/18/1997	-	RESPONSE TO RESPONDENT’S MOTION FOR CITATION IN CONTEMPT FILED BY DONALD R HOFFMAN
09/19/1997	-	ORDER TO RELEASE BUSINESS RECORDS PRODUCED BY SHAWNEE MENTAL HEALTH TO AINKA C KWELI – JPB Filmed 09/22/97.
09/22/1997	-	Subpoena duces tecum returned, personal service – as to MARY KELLY 09/18/97 .
09/23/1997	-	Subpoena duces tecum sent certified mail delivered , certified mail – as to DR GRACE MORRISON certified mail #P755988036 09/20/97 .
09/24/1997	-	Filed by Fax #34 Motion filed and entered by AINKA C KWELI for CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI FOR LEAVE.
09/25/1997	-	Subpoena duces tecum sent certified mail delivered , signed by addressee – as to GERI THOMPSON certified mail #P755988037 09/22/97 .
09/26/1997	-	SET – Telephone Conference on 10/03/97 at 11:00AM. in division 12.
09/26/1997	-	Notice sent.
09/29/1997	-	FINAL ARGUMENT FILED BY DONALD HOFFMAN.
09/29/1997	-	Filed by Fax RESPONDENT’S CLOSING SUMMATION AND ARGUMENT FILED BY AINKA C KWELI.
10/14/1997	-	Subpoena duces tecum returned certified mail requested , no service, no reason given – as to HAL RICHARDSON III 10/13/97
10/28/1997	-	Journal entry granting divorce, property division, custody child support. RFAD JPB
10/28/1997	-	RFAD; 10/28/97
10/29/1997	-	JOURNAL ENTRY OF DIVORCE FILED – JPB Child Support Worksheet
11/03/1997	-	Filed by Fax #35 Motion filed and entered by AINKA C KWELI for CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI FOR STAY PENDING APPEAL. Notice of Appeal filed by AINKA C KWELI for CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI, to the APPELLATE Court.
11/03/1997	-	SET – Motion Docket on 11/20/97 at 10:00AM. in division 12.
11/07/1997	-	#36 Motion filed and entered by DONALD R HOFFMAN for HAL RICHARDSON JOINING IN RESPONDENT’S MOTION FOR STAY AND MOTION TO ALTER OR AMEND JUDGMENT.
11/12/1997	-	SET – Motion Docket on 11/24/97 at 03:00PM. in division 12.
11/12/1997	-	Notice sent.
11/24/1997	-	NOTICE OF WITHDRAWAL FILED BY AINKA C. KWELI Filed by Fax
11/24/1997	-	Entry of appearance filed by GARY N GORUP. ENTERING HIS AP- PEARANCE AS ATTORNEY FOR CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI. FILED BY FAX.
11/25/1997	-	NOTICE OF SERVICE OF ORDER PURSUANT TO SUPREME COURT RULE 170 FILED BY DONALD R. HOFFMAN. Filmed 12/02/97.
12/01/1997	-	Journal Entry filed. JPB
12/08/1997	-	REQUEST FOR TRANSCRIPTS FILED BY GEARY N GORUP Filmed 12/09/97.
12/29/1997	-	NOTICE FROM THE APPELLATE COURT, MOTION BY APPELLANT, CLAUDINE DOMROWSKI FOR STAY PENDING APPEAL GRANTED.
01/05/1998	-	Card from the Clerk of the APPELLATE Court; they have received and filed the Notice of Appeal – Case No. 97-80304-A Filmed 01/16/98.
01/16/1998	-	Completed Table of Contents and mailed to attorneys; DONALD HOFFMAN AND GEARY GORUP
03/04/1998	-	Filed by Fax – INTER OFFICE MEMORANDUM. Filmed 03/09/98.
03/17/1998	-	Garnishment request filed by SCOTT D MCKENZIE
03/17/1998	-	Filmed 03/17/98.
03/17/1998	-	Garnishment order issued certified mail to STATE OF KANSAS IN TOPEKA, KS. for judgment as to CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI
03/24/1998	-	Garnishment sent certified mail delivered , certified mail – to STATE OF KANSAS certified mail #P756185657 03/20/98 .
04/07/1998	-	BUSINESS RECORDS OF JOHN FIORE-CHIEF SECURITY DESTROYED. RECEIVED RECORDS 03/07/97
04/07/1998	-	BUSINESS RECORDS OF LARNED STATE HOSPITAL DESTROYED. RECEIVED RECORDS 02/20/97 BUSINESS RECORDS OF JOHN FIORE-CHIEF SECURITY DESTROYED. RECEIVED RECORDS 03/10/97
04/13/1998	-	SUPREME COURT RULE NO. 3.02 REQUEST FOR ADDITIONS TO RECORD ON APPEAL FILED BY GEARY N GORUP. SUPPLEMENTAL REQUEST FOR TRANSCRIPTS FILED BY GEARY N GORUP.
04/15/1998	-	DEMAND FOR ESTIMATED COST OF TRANSCRIPT FILED BY ESTHER L THOMPSON.
04/21/1998	-	RECEIVED COPY OF LETTER REQUESTING TRANSCRIPT, CHECK SENT TO COURT REPORTER.
04/23/1998	-	LETTER FROM ESTHER L THOMPSON, COURT REPORTER RECEIVED HER ESTIMATED COST FOR ADDITIONAL TRANSCRIPT AND IS DUE ON 05/29/98 AND ANTICIPATE FILING THIS TRANSCRIPT BEFORE THIS DATE FILED.
05/04/1998	-	Answer of Garnishee STATE OF KANSAS returned and filed. Holding $169.38 Copy to attorney & RESPONDENT. (PAY PERIOD BEGINNING 03/08/98 & ENDING 03/21/98) Answer of Garnishee STATE OF KANSAS returned and filed. Holding $169.38 Copy to attorney & RESPONDENT. (PAY PERIOD BEGINNING 03/22/98 & ENDING 04/04/98) Answer of Garnishee STATE OF KANSAS returned and filed. Holding $169.38 Copy to attorney & RESPONDENT. (PAY PERIOD BEGINNING 04/05/98 & ENDING 04/18/98)
05/04/1998	-	RECEIVED EXHIBITS REQUESTED BY GEARY N. GORUP FROM THE COURT REPORTER. (3,A,B,& C)
05/04/1998	-	CERTIFICATE OF TRANSCRIPT FILED BY ESTHER L. THOMPSON TRANSCRIPT OF HEARING HELD ON 18TH & 19TH OF SEPTEMBER 97.
05/04/1998	-	TRANSCRIPT OF VOLUME II OF PROTIONS OF COURT TRIAL HELD ON 18T & 19TH DAYS OF SEPTEMBER 1997.
05/06/1998	-	Order to pay in and pay out filed. STATE OF KANSAS to pay in $169.38 Clerk to pay SCOTT D MCKENZIE. -JPB
05/06/1998	-	Garnishment request filed by SCOTT D MCKENZIE
05/06/1998	-	Filmed 05/07/98.
05/07/1998	-	Garnishment order issued certified mail to STATE OF KANSAS IN TOPEKA, KS. for judgment as to CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI
05/07/1998	-	Garnishment request filed by SCOTT D MCKENZIE
05/07/1998	-	Filmed 05/08/98.
05/07/1998	-	Garnishment order issued certified mail to COMMERCE BANK AND TRUST IN TOPEKA, KS. for judgment as to HAL RICHARDSON
05/12/1998	-	NOTICE OF WITHDRAWAL AND DISMISSAL OF GARNISHMENTS FILED BY SCOTT MCKENZIE. CERTIFIED COPY SENT TO STATE OF KANSAS
05/13/1998	-	Answer of Garnishee COMMERCE BANK AND TRUST returned and filed. Holding $.00 Copy to attorney.(UNABLE TO FIND ACCOUNT)
05/14/1998	-	Garnishment sent certified mail delivered , certified mail – to STATE OF KANSAS certified mail #P756103038 05/11/98 .
05/14/1998	-	Garnishment sent certified mail delivered , certified mail – to COMMERCE BANK AND TRUST certified mail #P756063503 05/12/98 .
05/18/1998	-	Received from the Supreme Court of the State of Kansas, a request to transmit the Record on Appeal to Clerk of the Appellate Courts.
05/18/1998	-	HAND CARRIED RECORD ON APPEAL TO THE CLERK OF THE APPELLATE COURT 05/20/98.
12/30/1998	-	Mandate from the APPELLATE Court filed. Judgment of District Court, AFFIRMED. MEMORANDUM attached.
01/05/1999	-	LETTER TO HARRY MOORE FROM GEARY N GORUP DATED 12/31/98 THAT KANSAS SUPREME COURT HAS DENIED PETITION FOR REVIEW.
01/05/1999	-	BUSINESS RECORDS OF SHERRI KELLER DESTROYED. RECEIVED RECORDS 08/27/97 BUSINESS RECORDS OF TOPEKA POLICE DEPARTMENT DESTROYED. RECEIVED RECORDS 09/10/97 BUSINESS RECORDS OF AT & T DESTROYED. RECEIVED RECORDS 09/03/97
01/05/1999	-	BUSINESS RECORDS OF JENNY SHAW DESTROYED. RECEIVED RECORDS 08/26/97 BUSINESS RECORDS OF BATTERED WOMANS TASK FORCE DESTROYED. RECEIVED RECORDS 09/02/97
01/29/1999	-	ENTRY OF APPEARANCE FILED BY REBECCA A KING ON BEHALF OF CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI. Filmed 02/01/99.
02/09/1999	-	CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE FILED BY REBECCA A KING. Filmed 02/11/99.
03/02/1999	-	#37 Motion filed and entered by DONALD R HOFFMAN for HAL RICHARDSON FOR STATUS CONFERENCE WITH THE COURT.
03/17/1999	-	SET – Status Conference on 03/30/99 at 09:00AM. in division 12.
03/17/1999	-	Notice sent.
03/23/1999	-	CASE MANAGER RECOMMENDATIONS ORDER. JPB RECOMMENDATION LETTER FROM HARRY MOORE ATTACHED.
03/30/1999	-	Hoffman and petitioner; King for respondent. Agreed case should be referred to case manager for further work before motions. JPB
03/30/1999	-	COPY OF MEMO TO HARRY MOORE FROM JUDGE JAMES BUCHELE.
05/10/1999	-	OBJECTION TO CASE MANAGER RECOMMENDATIONS filed by REBECCA A KING
05/13/1999	-	CASE MANAGER RECOMMENDATIONS filed by HARRY MOORE ORDER ON CASE MANAGER RECOMMENDATIONS filed – JPB
05/27/1999	-	Transcript of TELEPHONE CALL, held 05/26/99 filed.
05/28/1999	-	#38 Motion filed and entered by DONALD R HOFFMAN for HAL RICHARDSON TO ADVANCE HEARING ON RESPONDENT’S OBJECTIONS TO CASE MANAGER RECOMMENDATIONS.
05/28/1999	-	ORDER FOR HEARING FILED – JPB ORDER FOR SERVICE FILED – JPB
05/28/1999	-	ORDER FOR HEARING issued as to HAL RICHARDSON personal service to the Sheriff of SHAWNEE County, KS.
05/28/1999	-	ORDER FOR HEARING issued as to CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI personal service to the Sheriff of SHAWNEE County, KS.
05/28/1999	-	RETURN OF SERVICE ON ORDER FOR HEARING WAS FAXED TO PAWNEE COUNTY SHERIFF FOR PERSONAL SERVICE ON CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI AS PER JUDGE BUCHELE
06/01/1999	-	ORDER FOR HEARING returned , personal service – as to CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI returned by fax 05/28/99 .
06/03/1999	-	ORDER FOR HEARING returned , personal service – as to HAL RICHARDSON 06/01/99 . Entered by 0211.
06/09/1999	-	Praecipe for Subpoena/Subpoena Duces Tecum filed by DONALD R HOFFMAN. (2 PRAECIPES)
06/09/1999	-	Subpoena issued personal service returnable 06/15/99 09:00A.M. as to LENA NATION issued to special process server. $12.50 Witness fee. Requested by DONALD R HOFFMAN
06/09/1999	-	Subpoena issued personal service returnable 06/15/99 09:00A.M. as to SHAWN NATION issued to special process server. $106.50 Witness fee. Requested by DONALD R HOFFMAN
06/14/1999	-	Filed by Fax
06/14/1999	-	#39 Motion filed and entered by REBECCA A KING for CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI FOR CHANGE OF CUSTODY,CHILD SUPPORT,& MODIFICA- TION OF PREVIOUS JOURNAL ENTRY REQUIRING RESPONDENT TO MOVE TO TOPEKA & TO CHANGE THE MINOR CHILD’S SURNAME. Filmed 06/16/99
06/14/1999	-	Child Support Worksheet Filmed 06/16/99.
06/14/1999	-	Filed by Fax
06/14/1999	-	DOMESTIC RELATIONS AFFIDAVIT OF RESPONDENT Filmed 06/16/99. APPLICATION FOR CHANGE OF VENUE. Filmed 06/16/99 AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF RECUSAL OF THE HONORABLE JAMES BUCHELE. Filmed 06/16/99
06/15/1999	-	Subpoena returned , personal service – BY LEAVING WITH SHAWN, FATHER OF LENA – as to LENA NATION 06/11/99 Filmed 06/16/99.
06/15/1999	-	Subpoena returned , personal service – as to SHAWN NATION 06/11/99 Filmed 06/16/99.
06/15/1999	-	#40 Motion filed and entered by REBECCA A KING for CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI FOR RECUSAL OF JUDGE. Filmed 06/22/99
06/16/1999	-	06/15/99 Parties appear with counsel Hoffman and King. Hearing held on issue of enforecement of prior order and order of case manager enforcing the order to move to Shawnee County. Miscellaneous orders stated on the record. King to prepare Journal Entry and submit per Rule 170. JPB
06/21/1999	-	TRANSCRIPT OF INFORMAL HEARING ON MOTION TO RECUSE
06/22/1999	-	MEMORANDUM TO JUDGE BULLOCK FROM JUDGE BUCHELE REGARDING MOTION FOR RECUSAL FILED BY REBECCA KING FILED. Filmed 06/23/99.
06/28/1999	-	ORDER TO ENFORCE PRIOR ORDER, ORDER ESTABLISHING SUPERVISED VISITATION, ORDER FOR HEARING ON CHILD SUPPORT, ORDER ON MOTION TO CHANGE VENUE AND ORDER AMENDING PRIOR DECISION REGARDING SURNAME FILED. – JPB
06/28/1999	-	LETTER FROM JUDGE BUCHELE TO DONALD HOFFMAN REGARDING HEARING ON 6-15-99 ON VISITATION.
07/01/1999	-	SET – Hearing on 07/09/00 at 11:00AM. in division 12.
07/08/1999	-	Ruling on motion# 40 —Affidavit in Support of Recusal of Respondent DISMISSED by Court per Memorandum Decision and Order filed. JMM
07/08/1999	-	MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER FILED. – JMM
07/09/1999	-	CHILD SUPPORT WORKSHEET OF PETITIONER
07/12/1999	-	LETTER FROM JUDGE BUCHELE TO JUDGE BULLOCK REGARDING TRANFER PENDING CASE TO DIFFERENT JUDGE.
07/16/1999	-	AGREED UPON ORDER FOR CHILD SUPPORT FILED BY REBECCA KING. – JPB (attached Child Support Worksheet of Petitioner)
07/21/1999	-	Reassigned to division 2 from division 12. OJA reason for transfer 1.
07/26/1999	-	Notice of Appeal filed by REBECCA A KING for CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI, to the Court of Appeals of the State of Kansas.
07/26/1999	-	Filed by Fax
07/26/1999	-	AFFIDAVIT OF TRANSMISSION BY FAX FORM FOR RULE 119(d)(4)
07/26/1999	-	#41 Motion filed and entered by REBECCA A KING for CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI FOR STAY PENDING APPEAL PURSUANT TO K.S.A. 60-262
07/26/1999	-	Filed by Fax
07/26/1999	-	AFFIDAVIT OF TRANSMISSION BY FAX FORM FOR RULE 119(d)(4)
07/28/1999	-	SET – Motion Docket on 08/12/99 at 10:30AM. in division 02.
08/04/1999	-	Filed by Fax
08/04/1999	-	#42 Motion filed and entered by REBECCA A KING for CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI TO ADVANCE THE HEARING ON RESPONDENT’S AND FOR CHANGE OF CUSTODY.
08/12/1999	-	NOTICE OF SERVICE OF ORDER FILED BY DONALD R HOFFMAN.
08/12/1999	-	Shawn Hoff, reporter. Pet by Hoffman. Resp by King. Resp’s motion to stay 6-28-99 order under K.S.A. 60-262 denied. Hoffman instructed to prepare J.E. RDA
08/12/1999	-	Filmed 09/21/99
08/13/1999	-	LETTER TO JUDGE ANDERSON FROM HARRY MOORE
08/13/1999	-	LETTER TO REBECCA KING FROM HARRY MOORE
08/13/1999	-	LETTER TO HARRY MOORE FROM REBECCA KING
08/30/1999	-	#43 Motion filed and entered by REBECCA A KING for CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI TO WITHDRAW AS ATTORNEY OF RECORD.
08/31/1999	-	LETTER FROM JUDGE ANDERSON TO DONALD HOFFMAN
09/01/1999	-	SET – Motion Docket on 09/23/99 at 09:30AM. in division 02.
09/01/1999	-	OBJECTION TO MOTION TO WITHDRAW AS ATTY OF RECORD BY COUNSEL FOR RESP FILED BY DONALD R HOFFMAN.
09/02/1999	-	SET – Show Cause on 09/21/99 at 01:30PM. in division 02.
09/02/1999	-	AFFIDAVIT SIGNED BY HAL RICHARDSON
09/02/1999	-	#44 Motion filed and entered by DONALD R HOFFMAN for HAL RICHARDSON FOR ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE ORDER TO APPEAR FILED BY DONALD HOFFMAN – RDA
09/02/1999	-	Request for Service filed by DONALD R HOFFMAN RETURN OF SERVICE ON ORDER TO APPEAR WAS FAXED TO BARTON CTY SHERIFF FOR PERSONAL SERVICE ON CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI.
09/03/1999	-	AFFIDAVIT,MOTION FOR ORDER,ORDER TO APPEAR issued as to CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI personal service to the Sheriff of SHAWNEE County, KS.
09/03/1999	-	JOURNAL ENTRY FILED BY DONALD R HOFFMAN. – RDA (re: motion for order of stay)
09/03/1999	-	ORDER TO APPEAR FILED BY DONALD R HOFFMAN – RDA
09/09/1999	-	RECEIVED CHANGE OF ADDRESS FOR CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI. SENT TO DCT.
09/09/1999	-	#45 Motion filed and entered by CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI for CONTEMPT FOR FAILURE TO PAY CHILD SUPPORT AFFIDAVIT TO SUPPORT MOTION OF CONTEMPT signed by CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI
09/10/1999	-	AFFIDAVIT, MOTION FOR ORDER, ORDER TO APPEAR returned personal service requested. Served Claudine Dombrowski on 9/9/99 at 112 W 7th Street.
09/21/1999	-	HEARING: Shawn Hoff, reporter. Pet. appears in person & by Donald Hoffman. Resp. appears in person & by Rebecca King. Trial on Pet’s Motion to Show Cause (#44). Motion #44 denied. Pet has failed to prove resp. did not estabish residency in Topeka by Sept. 1, 1999 as required by Court’s June 28, 1999 Order. Resp’s Motion for Attorney Fees denied. Shawn Hoff, reporter. RDA
09/21/1999	-	Ms. King withdraws Motion #43 to Withdraw as Attorney. RDA
09/22/1999	-	AFFIDAVIT,MOTION FOR ORDER,ORDER TO APPEAR returned personal service requested , no service, no reason given – as to CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI 09/22/99 . 5100 HOUCK STREETOR 5200; HOUCK STREET; PAWNEE ROCK, KS 67567 -
09/22/1999	-	RESPONSE TO PETITIONER’S OBJECTION TO MOTION TO WITHDRAW AS ATTORNEY OF RECORD BY COUNSEL FOR RESPONDENT FILED BY REBECCA KING.
09/22/1999	-	RESPONSE MF 100199
09/22/1999	-	OBJECTION AND REQUEST FOR DISMISSAL OF ORDER TO APPEAR FILED BY REBECCA A KING.
09/22/1999	-	OBJECTION FILMED 100599
09/27/1999	-	NOTICE FROM APPELLATE COURT OF ACTION TAKEN – ORDER DENYING MOTION TO STAY AND ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE MF 100699
09/27/1999	-	ACTIVITY NOTICE FROM APPELLATE COURT – PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS FILED AND MOTION FOR STAY PENDING APPEAL MF 100699
09/28/1999	-	Transcript of MOTIONS & OBJECTIONS TO CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER held 6-15-99 filed.
09/29/1999	-	Filmed 09/29/99
10/13/1999	-	Card from the Clerk of the APPELLATE Court; they have received and filed the Notice of Appeal – Case No. 99-83905-A Filmed 10/14/99.
10/22/1999	-	Completed Table of Contents and mailed to attorneys; HOFFMAN, KING, BEFORT, & KEESHAN
11/03/1999	-	REQUEST FOR REASSIGNMENT OF THE CASE MANAGER FILED BY REBECCA KING
11/03/1999	-	OBJECTION TO CASE MANAGER RECOMMENDATIONS FILED BY REBECCA A KING.
11/09/1999	-	RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR REASSIGNMENT OF CASE MANAGER FILED BY DONALD R HOFFMAN.
11/12/1999	-	Notice of Hearing filed. To be heard 11/19/99 at 02:30P.M.
11/18/1999	-	REQUEST FOR REASSIGNMENT & OBJECTION TO CASE MANAGER MF 111899
11/24/1999	-	Filmed 12/02/99
11/24/1999	-	JE MF 120299
11/24/1999	-	MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER FILED. -RDA (RE: REASSIGNMENT OF CASE MANAGER) JOURNAL ENTRY FILED. -RDA (RE: VISITATION)
03/10/2000	-	NOTICE OF ADDRESS CHANGE FROM US POSTAL SERVICE FOR CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI. UPDATED COURT RECORD. SENT NOTICE TO DISTRICT COURT TRUSTEE
03/27/2000	-	OBJECTION TO CASE MANAGER RECOMMENDATIONS FILED BY DONALD R HOFFMAN.
03/30/2000	-	RESPONDENT’S RESPONSE TO PETITIONER’S OBJECTION TO CASE MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION FILED BY REBECCA A KING
03/30/2000	-	Filed by Fax
03/30/2000	-	AFFIDAVIT OF TRANSMISSION BY FAX FILED BY REBECCA A KING
03/30/2000	-	Filed by Fax
04/06/2000	-	Notice of Hearing filed. To be heard 06/08/00 at 09:00A.M.
04/06/2000	-	SET – Hearing on 06/08/00 at 09:00AM. in division 02.
04/11/2000	-	NOTICE OF REQUEST OF BUSINESS RECORDS SUBPOENA FILED BY DONALD R HOFFMAN AS TO GREAT BEND SHERIFF DEPT.
04/11/2000	-	NOTICE OF REQUEST OF BUSINESS RECORDS SUBPOENA FILED BY DONALD R HOFFMAN AS TO PAWNEE ROCK POLICE DEPT.
04/11/2000	-	NOTICE OF REQUEST OF BUSINESS RECORDS SUBPOENA FILED BY DONALD R HOFFMAN AS TO SOUTHWESTERN BELL TELEPHONE CO.
04/11/2000	-	NOTICE OF REQUEST OF BUSINESS RECORDS SUBPOENA FILED BY DONALD R HOFFMAN AS TO WESTERN RESOURCES INC.
04/14/2000	-	OBJECTION TO ISSUANCE OF BUSINESS RECORDS SUBPOENA FILED BY REBECCA A KING AFFIDAVIT OF TRANSMISSION BY FAX FORM FOR RULE 119(d)(4)
04/14/2000	-	Filed by Fax
04/17/2000	-	$20.00 recd from HOFFMAN,DONALD,R, (20.00 DM POST DIVORCE MOT)
04/17/2000	-	#46 Motion filed and entered by DONALD R HOFFMAN for HAL RICHARDSON TO CHANGE RESIDENTIAL CUSTODY
04/17/2000	-	Notice of Hearing filed. To be heard 06/08/00 at 09:00A.M.
04/17/2000	-	AMENDED OBJECTION TO ISSUANCE OF BUSINESS RECORDS SUBPOENAS FILED BY REBECCA A KING AFFIDAVIT OF TRANSMISSION BY FAX FORM FOR RULE 119(d))4)
04/26/2000	-	#47 Motion filed and entered by REBECCA A KING for CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI, TO DISMISS PETITIONER’S MOTION TO CHANGE RESIDENTIAL CUSTODY. Filed by Fax
04/26/2000	-	#48 Motion filed and entered by REBECCA A KING for CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI, FOR PRETRIAL CONFERENCE.
05/08/2000	-	SET – Motion Docket on 05/25/00 at 11:00AM. in division 02.
05/08/2000	-	Motion for Pretrial set on docket at request of Ms. King. She will send notice. Vi
05/08/2000	-	Notice of Hearing filed. To be heard 05/25/00 at 11:00A.M.
05/11/2000	-	LETTER RULING: (1) Pet’s Motion to Change Residential Custody (Motion #46) dismissed as premature. The issues must first be presented to the Case Manager. (2) Resp’s Motion to Dismiss Petitioner’s Motion to Change Residential Custody (Motion #47) is denied as moot. (3) Resp’s Motion for Pretrial Conference is denied as moot (4) June 8, 2000 hearing will relate only to Case Manager Objections. RDA
05/12/2000	-	LETTER FROM JUDGE ANDERSON TO DONALD R HOFFMAN & REBECCA A KING DATED 05/12/00
06/08/2000	-	HEARING ON PET’S OBJECTIONS TO CASE MANAGEMENT: S. Hoff, reporter. Pet. appears in person & by Don Hoffman. Resp. appears in person & by Rebecca King. ORDER: Recommendations adopted in part & denied in part. RULINGS: (1) Mr. Richardson’s visitation expanded – alternating weekends Fri thru Sun, exchange times subject to parties’ agreement or absent agreement, Court will set times for exchange sua sponte; Wed. visits to remain same as Nov. 1999 order; Holiday visits per Guidelines – father parent A; mother parent B. Summer visitation 3 weeks. (2) Tele visits permitted & encouraged; (3) Y-Safe visit monitored exchange terminated, parties to work w/Case Manager to determine alternate exchange location or parties may agree to have direct exchange; (4) July 21, 2000 @ 9 a.m. – Hearing re: enrollment in school residency placement & mother’s request to move. (5) Parties to submit CSW w/in 15 days together with positions on Child Support & unreimbursed medical expenses. (6) Restraining orders modified to permit parents to talk re: child & to permit exchange. (7) Ms. Dombrowsksi directed to release employment informa- tion to Court Services – Mr. Moore to prepare report & distribute report to parties. (8) Court Reporter to prepare transcript of Court’s Order. Costs of transcript assigned equally to parties. RDA
06/09/2000	-	SET – Hearing on 07/21/00 at 09:00AM. in division 02.
06/09/2000	-	Notice sent.
07/06/2000	-	JOURNAL ENTRY FILED – RDA (re: Modifies & Denies the Recommendations of Case Manager Harry Moore contained in the report date 03/21/00 as stated in the Transcript held 060800
07/06/2000	-	Transcript of COURTS RULING, held 06/08/00 filed.
07/21/2000	-	HEARING: S. Hoff, reporter. Pet. appears in person & by Don Hoffman. Resp. appears in person & by Rebecca King. Hearing re: enrollment in school. Ms. Dombrowski requests to be released from Court’s order to live in Topeka with Rikki. RDA
07/31/2000	-	MEMORANDUM DECISION & ORDER FILED – RDA.
08/07/2000	-	#49 Motion filed and entered by CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI, PRO SE, FOR EMERGENCY HEARING OR EX PARTE MOTION. Filed by fax
08/08/2000	-	#50 Motion filed and entered by REBECCA A KING for CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI, FOR A NEW TRIAL.
08/08/2000	-	### MOTION FILED BY REBECCA A KING TO WITHDRAW AS COUNSEL OF RECORD FOR RESPONDENT
08/09/2000	-	Mandate from the APPELLATE Court filed. Judgment of District Court, AFFIRMED. MEMORANDUM OPINION attached.
08/10/2000	-	SET – Motion Docket on 08/24/00 at 10:30AM. in division 02.
08/14/2000	-	Order to Withdraw as Attorney of Record signed. DEB
08/14/2000	-	Order for withdrawal of attorney, REBECCA A KING, filed. – DEB
08/28/2000	-	JOURNAL ENTRY FILED – RDA.
09/05/2000	-	ENTRY OF APPEARANCE FILED BY KYLE KAY WINGFIELD ON BEHALF OF CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI.
09/07/2000	-	Report received from Harry Moore & placed in social file.Vi3
09/11/2000	-	$20.00 recd from WINGFIELD,KYLE,KAY, (20.00 DM POST DIVORCE MOT)
09/11/2000	-	#51 Motion filed and entered by KYLE KAY WINGFIELD for CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI, TO MODIFY CUSTODY AND VISITATION.
09/14/2000	-	SET – Motion Docket on 09/28/00 at 09:30AM. in division 02.
09/28/2000	-	MOTION DOCKET: S.Hoff, reporter. Pet. appears in person & by Don Hoffman. Resp. appears in person & by Kyle Wingfield Case Manager will report to Court within 30 days how Rikki is adjusting to father’s home, school & parenting plan. Motion to Change Custody denied. RDA
12/19/2000	-	ORDER FILED BY DONALD R HOFFMAN – RDA.
12/20/2000	-	SET – Motion Hearing on 01/17/01 at 09:00AM. in division 02.
12/20/2000	-	MH notice sent.
12/27/2000	-	### MOTION FILED BY KYLE KAY WINGFIELD TO WITHDRAW AS COUNSEL OF RECORD FOR RESPONDENT
12/28/2000	-	#52 Motion filed and entered by DONALD R HOFFMAN for HAL RICHARDSON, FOR EX PARTE’ ORDER TERMINATING RESPONDENT’S CONTACT WITH MINOR CHILD OF PARTIES
12/28/2000	-	OBJECTION TO MOTION FOR WITHDRAWAL BY COUNSEL FILED
12/29/2000	-	ORDER SUSPENDING PARENTING TIME FILED. – RDA
01/11/2001	-	ENTRY OF APPEARANCE FILED BY LEONARD M ROBINSON ON BEHALF OF CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI
01/18/2001	-	$20.00 Cash recd from ROBINSON,LEONARD,M, (20.00 DM POST DIVORCE MOT)
01/18/2001	-	ENTRY OF APPEARANCE FILED BY LEONARD M ROBINSON ON BEHALF OF CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI.
01/18/2001	-	#53 Motion filed and entered by LEONARD M ROBINSON for CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI (suspended visitation)
01/19/2001	-	Order for withdrawal of attorney, KYLE KAY WINGFIELD, filed. – RDA
01/25/2001	-	CERTIFIED COPY OF ORDER TO RETURN CHILD TO HAL RICHARDSON RETURNED BY SHAWNEE COUNTY SHERIFF DEPARTMENT. ORDER NOT SERVED. NO CONTACT AS OF 01/22/01.
02/08/2001	-	LETTER FROM LEONARD M ROBINSON TO JUDGE ANDERSON DATED 01/30/01.
03/07/2001	-	Received call from Hoffman on their motion in which they will send notice. t/c with Robinson. ka
03/07/2001	-	SET – Administrative Hearing Officer Child Support Mot. on 04/02/01 at 02:30PM. in room 311.
03/07/2001	-	Received e-mail from case manager stating child support should be reviewed. lly/aho
03/09/2001	-	#54 Motion filed and entered by DONALD R HOFFMAN for HAL RICHARDSON TO ESTABLISH CHILD SUPPORT
03/09/2001	-	Child Support Worksheet OF FATHER
03/12/2001	-	NOTIFIED MR. HOFFMAN’S OFFICE OF THE NEED FOR A $20.00 MOTION FILING FEE.
03/13/2001	-	$20.00 recd from HOFFMAN,DONALD,R, (20.00 DM POST DIVORCE MOT)
03/13/2001	-	AMENDED NOTICE OF HEARING FOR 04/02/01 @ 02:30 PM
03/30/2001	-	Filed by Fax: RESPONDENT’S DOMESTIC RELATIONS AFFIDAVIT RESPONDENT’S SUPPORT WORKSHEET
04/02/2001	-	DOMESTIC RELATIONS AFFIDAVIT OF PETITIONER
04/02/2001	-	Child Support: Ruling on Motion #54. Tape 681, 1689-1861. Estimated Cost 12.00. Appearance by Petitioner and with counsel D. Hoffman. Appearance by Respondent and with counse l L. Robinson. AHO recuses herself from this case. Respond ent is married to AHO cousin. Attorney to contact Div 2 for hearing date and time. lly/aho
05/18/2001	-	SET – Motion Hearing on 08/06/01 at 03:00PM. in division 02.
05/18/2001	-	MH notice sent.
05/18/2001	-	LETTER FROM DONALD R HOFFMAN TO JUDGE ANDERSON DATED 05/03/01.
07/13/2001	-	$20.00 Check recd from DOMBROWSKI,CLAUDINE,, (20.00 DM POST DIVORCE MOT)
07/13/2001	-	#56 Motion filed and entered by LEONARD M ROBINSON for CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI, FOR CHANGE OF RESIDENTIAL CUSTODY
07/23/2001	-	LETTER FROM JUDGE ANDERSON TO LEONARD ROBINSON & DONALD HOFFMAN DATED 07/20/01.
07/25/2001	-	Advised by counsel they have reached an agreement as to child support. Hearing on 8-6-01 deleted. Vi
08/06/2001	-	AGREED ORDER FILED – RDA. MANDATORY SUPPLEMENTAL ORDERS FILED. KPC INFORMATION SHEET FILED.
08/22/2001	-	LETTER FROM JUDGE LUCKERT TO DONALD HOFFMAN & LEONARD ROBINSON DATED 08/21/01.
08/27/2001	-	LETTER FROM JUDGE LUCKERT TO DONALD HOFFMAN & LEONARD ROBINSON DATED 08/27/01.
09/06/2001	-	LETTER FROM JUDGE LUCKERT TO DONALD HOFFMAN & LEONARD ROBINSON DATED 09/05/01.
09/07/2001	-	THE ABOVE LETTERS DATED 08/21/01, 08/27/01 AND 09/05/01 HAVE BEEN PLACED IN THE CLERK OF THE DIST. COURT’S SAFE
10/19/2001	-	Electronic Request for Income Withholding Order filed by DANNY J VOPAT
10/19/2001	-	Income Withholding Order issued certified mail as to CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI
10/22/2001	-	### MOTION FOR MODIFICATION OF INCOME WITHHOLDING ORDER AND COMBINED SUPPORTING MEMORANDUM FILED BY DIST. COURT TRUSTEE
10/29/2001	-	RESPONSE TO MOTION FOR MODIFICATION OF INCOME WITHHOLDING ORDER AND COMBINED SUPPORTING MEMORANDUM
11/08/2001	-	REQUEST FOR REVIEW OF CASE MANAGER RECOMMENDATIONS
11/08/2001	-	(Original Request for Review document kept in the Imaging department, photo did not image well.)
11/13/2001	-	Income Withholding Order returned certified mail requested , no service, unclaimed – as to CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI 11/09/01 . PO BOX 984; MANHATTAN, KS 66505 – Entered by 0876.
12/20/2001	-	LETTER FROM LEONARD M ROBINSON TO JUDGE ANDERSON DATED 12/19/01.
12/21/2001	-	SET – Support Docket on 01/22/02 at 08:30AM.
12/21/2001	-	Setting made per attorney request.
12/21/2001	-	Electronic Request for Application for examination of judgment debtor filed by DANNY J VOPAT
12/21/2001	-	Order issued first class mail returnable 01/22/02 08:30A.M. as to CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI
12/28/2001	-	Order returned , first class mail – as to CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI 12/27/01 . Entered by 2995.
01/09/2002	-	ORDER DISMISSING MOTION & ORDER TO APPEAR & SHOW CAUSE FILED – RDA.
01/10/2002	-	MOTION & ORDER TO WITHDRAW MOTION FOR MODIFICATION OF INCOME WITHHOLDING ORDER FILED – RDA.
01/16/2002	-	MEMORANDUM DECISION & ORDER ON CASE MANAGER RECOMMENDATIONS OF OCTOBER 30,2001 FILED – RDA.
01/25/2002	-	KPC COURT ORDER ENTRY, COPY OF WEB PAGE
01/25/2002	-	Notice of assignment of support rights filed IV-D AFDC.
01/25/2002	-	PARTICIPANT IS 1O/R-2O/E HAL RICHARDSON.
01/29/2002	-	REQUEST FOR HEARING AND OTHER RELIEF FILED BY LEONARD M ROBINSON
02/14/2002	-	ORDER FILED – RDA.
02/19/2002	-	LETTER DECISION FILED – RDA.
03/11/2002	-	STATUS CONFERENCE: S. Hoff, reporter. Pet. appears in person & by Don Hoffman. Resp. appears in person & by Leonard Robinson. Also, attending CM Harry Moore; Dr. Milfred Dale, Court evaluator; Dr. Bonnie Uffman, Resp’s therapist; Rene Netherton, re gal assignment; Resp’s husband, Mr. Yockers; Ms. Stumpf, maternal grandmother. AGREEMENTS & ORDERS: (1) Parties agree Dr. Dale will serve as Court’s evaluator for risk in unsupervised visits w/ Resp. & recommendation for therapy. Resp. to pay expense of evaluation. (2) Harry Moore resigns as CM. Parties to suggest names of successor. (3) Parties to work on PT schedule to be implemented after evaluation & on condition that unsupervised PT approved. RDA
03/22/2002	-	LETTER FROM RENE M NETHERTON TO JUDGE ANDERSON DATED 03/20/02.
03/22/2002	-	LETTER FROM JUDGE ANDERSON TO DR MILFRED DALE DATED 03/22/02.
03/22/2002	-	LETTER FROM JUDGE ANDERSON TO DONALD HOFFMAN & LEONARD ROBINSON DATED 03/22/02.
04/19/2002	-	LETTER FROM DONALD R HOFFMAN TO JUDGE ANDERSON DATED 04/12/02.
04/19/2002	-	LETTER FROM JUDGE ANDERSON TO DONALD HOFFMAN & LEONARD ROBINSON DATED 04/19/02.
05/10/2002	-	Conf w/counsel re: parenting time schedule. RDA
07/01/2002	-	LETTER FROM LEONARD M ROBINSON TO DONALD R HOFFMAN DATED 05/22/02.
07/01/2002	-	LETTER FROM LEONARD M ROBINSON TO JUDGE ANDERSON DATED 06/28/02.
07/01/2002	-	LETTER FROM DONALD R HOFFMAN TO LEONARD M ROBINSON DATED 06/10/02.
07/15/2002	-	Hearing on Proposed Journal Entry. S. Hoff, reporter. Resp. appears in person & by Leonard Robinson. Pet. appears in person & by Don Hoffman. J. E. to be resubmitted with schedule & other provisions as ruled on by Court. Dr. Albott rather than Dr. Dale selected as therapist. RDA
07/16/2002	-	LETTER FROM LEONARD M ROBINSON TO JUDGE ANDERSON DATED 06/28/02.
07/24/2002	-	LETTER FROM DONALD R HOFFMAN TO LEONARD M ROBINSON DATED 06/10/02.
07/31/2002	-	Order for Unsupervised Parenting Time signed. deb
08/01/2002	-	ORDER FOR UNSUPERVISED PARENTING TIME FILED – DEB.
12/30/2002	-	NOTICE OF CHANGE OF ADDRESS OF ATTORNEY, FOR LEONARD M ROBINSON; UP-DATED RECORD
05/14/2003	-	Transfered from Div.02 to Div.03, New Judicial Assignment.
05/23/2003	-	#59 Motion filed and entered by LEONARD M ROBINSON for CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI FOR AN ORDER FOR WRITTEN REPORT
05/28/2003	-	SET – Motion Docket on 06/12/03 at 10:00AM. in division 03.
06/03/2003	-	#60 MOTION FOR MODIFICATION OF INCOME WITHHOLDING ORDER AND COMBINED SUPPORTING MEMORANDUM FILED BY DYNTEK
06/04/2003	-	Remove from Motion docket 6/12/03 agreed by attorneys
06/05/2003	-	SET – Support Docket on 07/15/03 at 08:30AM.
06/05/2003	-	#61 MOTION AND AFFIDAVIT FOR AN ORDER TO APPEAR AND SHOW CAUSE FILED BY JOAN HAWKINS
06/05/2003	-	CITATION IN CONTEMPT (FAILURE TO PAY) FILED BY JOAN HAWKINS – JMS
06/05/2003	-	Request for Service
06/05/2003	-	MOTION/AFFIDAVIT & CITATION IN CONTEMPT issued as to CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI personal service to the Sheriff of SHAWNEE County, KS.
06/10/2003	-	$25.00 Cashier Check recd from ROBINSON,LEONARD,M, (20.00 DM POST DIVORCE MOT; 5.00 DM Surcharge)
06/10/2003	-	#62 Motion filed and entered by LEONARD M ROBINSON for CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI, FOR CHANGE OF RESIDENTIAL CUSTODY
06/11/2003	-	SET – Motion Docket on 06/26/03 at 10:00AM. in division 03.
06/12/2003	-	Praecipe for Subpoena/Subpoena Duces Tecum filed by DONALD R HOFFMAN.
06/12/2003	-	Subpoena Duces Tecum issued personal service returnable 06/26/03 10:00A.M. as to TOPEKA POLICE DEPT & RESPONDING OFFICERS issued to special process server.
06/12/2003	-	ORDER FILED – JMS.
06/13/2003	-	MOTION/AFFIDAVIT & CITATION IN CONTEMPT returned , personal service – as to CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI 06/11/03 . Served by 0885. Entered by 1117.
06/13/2003	-	Praecipe for Subpoena/Subpoena Duces Tecum filed by DONALD R HOFFMAN.
06/16/2003	-	Subpoena Duces Tecum issued personal service returnable 06/26/03 10:00A.M. as to SHAWNEE CO SHERIFFS DEPT issued to special process server.
06/17/2003	-	Subpoena Duces Tecum returned , personal service – as to SHAWNEE CO SHERIFFS DEPT 06/17/03
06/19/2003	-	Remove from mot/d 6/26 and set for half a day hearing on 7/16/03 at 1:30 pm per call from Mr. Robinson’s office
06/19/2003	-	SET – Hearing on 07/16/03 at 01:30PM. in division 03.
06/23/2003	-	Subpoena Duces Tecum returned , personal service – as to TOPEKA POLICE DEPT & RESPONDING OFFICERS 06/12/03
06/27/2003	-	#63 Motion filed and entered by DONALD R HOFFMAN for HAL RICHARDSON, FOR CONTINUANCE RESPONSE TO RESPONDENT’S MOTION FOR CHANGE OF RESIDENTIAL CUSTODY FILED.
07/08/2003	-	LETTER FROM JUDGE SCHMIDT TO LEONARD M ROBINSON AND DONALD HOFFMAN DATED 07/07/03.
07/08/2003	-	ORDER TO WITHHOLD INCOME FOR CHILD SUPPORT – JMS
07/08/2003	-	CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
07/08/2003	-	LETTER DECISION FILED – DEB.
07/15/2003	-	CONTEMPT DOCKET: Ward Rowe appears for Dyntek. (2OR)Obligor not present but Leonard Robinson appears. Personal service 06/11/03. Order back 08/26/03 at 08:30AM EXPO
07/15/2003	-	Judge Schmidt recuses herself from this case.
07/23/2003	-	SET – Support Docket on 08/26/03 at 08:30AM.
07/28/2003	-	Notice of Hearing Continuance filed. To be heard 08/26/03 at 08:30A.M.
08/26/2003	-	Support Docket: CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI (2OR) Present.
08/26/2003	-	CONTEMPT DOCKET:ROWE APPEARS FOR DYNTEK.DISMISS CITATION.BCH
08/27/2003	-	Case Manager Recommendations received from Amanda Smith Wilson, Court Services. deb
09/04/2003	-	NOTICE OF DISMISSAL OF MOTION AND ORDER TO APPEAR AND SHOW CAUSE
09/04/2003	-	RESPONSE TO CASE MANAGER RECOMMENDATIONS
09/11/2003	-	PETITIONER’S REPLY TO RESPONDENT’S RESPONSE TO CASE MANAGER RECOMMENDATIONS
09/30/2003	-	Case Management Order filed – DEB.
09/30/2003	-	LETTER DECISION FILED – DEB.
10/10/2003	-	LETTER FROM LLOYD SWARTZ, DOMESTIC CASE MANAGER, TO CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI AND HAL RICHARDSON DATED 10/06/03.
10/30/2003	-	*******AHO RECUSES HERSELF FROM THE CASE **********KA
11/18/2003	-	SET – Hearing on 12/19/03 at 01:30PM. in room 311.
11/18/2003	-	Notice of hearing for 12/19/03 Hearing issued .
12/09/2003	-	#64 Motion filed and entered by DONALD R HOFFMAN for HAL RICHARDSON, FOR CONTINUANCE
01/06/2004	-	Notice to Withhold Income for Child Support.
01/08/2004	-	Order to Withhold Income for Child Support – JMS
01/08/2004	-	LETTER FROM LLOYD C SWARTZ DATED 01/06/04
01/13/2004	-	Agreed Order signed. deb
01/13/2004	-	SATISFACTION OF JUDGMENT AND LEIN SIGNED BY CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI
01/14/2004	-	SATISFACTION OF JUDGMENT AND LIEN SIGNED BY HAL RICHARDSON
01/14/2004	-	AGREED ORDER FILED – DEB.
01/23/2004	-	Order re: case manager’s letter signed. deb
01/23/2004	-	ORDER FILED – DEB.
02/12/2004	-	WRITTEN OBJECTION TO FEBRUARY 2004 RECOMMENDATION OF DOMESTIC CASE MANAGER FILED BY FAX
02/20/2004	-	LETTER DECISION FILED – DEB.
03/02/2004	-	LETTER FROM LLOYD C SWARTZ TO JUDGE BRUNS DATED 02/26/04.
03/02/2004	-	LETTER DECISION FILED – DEB.
03/03/2004	-	LETTER DECISION FILED – DEB.
03/11/2004	-	LETTER FROM DIV. 12 TO RALPH RAPOSA DATED 03/11/04.
04/28/2004	-	LETTER DECISION FILED – DEB.
04/28/2004	-	Reassigned to division 12 from division 3. OJA reason for transfer 2.
04/29/2004	-	$26.00 Cash recd from DOMBROWSKI,CLAUDINE,, (21.00 DM POST DIVORCE MOT; 5.00 DM Surcharge)
04/29/2004	-	#65 Motion filed and entered by CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI, PRO SE, FOR EXPEDITED HEARING TO REMOVE DOMESTIC CASE MANAGER FOR CAUSE AND REINSTATE UNSUPERVISED VISITATION
05/03/2004	-	ORDER FILED – DEB.
05/03/2004	-	ORDER FILED – DEB.
05/04/2004	-	LETTER DECISION FILED – DEB.
05/06/2004	-	LETTER FROM LLOYD C SWARTZ TO CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI DATED 05/04/04.
05/07/2004	-	#66 MOTION FILED BY LEONARD M ROBINSON TO WITHDRAW AS COUNSEL OF RECORD FOR RESPONDENT
05/07/2004	-	NOTICE OF WITHDRAWAL FILED
05/10/2004	-	Order Authorizing Withdrawal of Counsel from Leonard Robinson signed. deb
05/10/2004	-	RESPONSE OF DOMESTIC CASE MANAGER TO MOTION FOR EZPEDITED HEARING TO REMOVE DOMESTIC CASE MANAGER FOR CAUSE AND REINSTATE UNSUPERVISED VISITATION
05/10/2004	-	Order for withdrawal of attorney, LEONARD M ROBINSON – DEB
05/12/2004	-	NOTICE OF INTENT TO ISSUE INVESTIGATIVE REPORTS SUBPOENA FILED BY DONALD R HOFFMAN AS TO SHAWNEE COUNTY SHERIFF’S OFFICE.
05/20/2004	-	Order signed. deb
05/20/2004	-	ORDER FILED – DEB.
05/24/2004	-	Filed by fax – RESPONSE TO NOTICE OF INTENT TO ISSUE INVESTIGATION REPORTS SUBPOENA
05/26/2004	-	PRAECIPE FOR INVESTIGATIVE REPORTS SUBPOENA FILED BY DONALD R HOFFMAN
05/27/2004	-	Subpoena – Business Records issued personal service returnable 06/01/04 05:00P.M. as to SHAWNEE COUNTY SHERIFF’S OFFICE
05/27/2004	-	LETTER FROM CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI TO LLOYD SWARTZ DATED 01/01/04.
05/27/2004	-	LETTER DECISION FILED – DEB.
06/01/2004	-	Affidavit of Business Records from SHAWNEE COUNTY SHERIFF’S OFFICE filed. Business Records received. DONALD R HOFFMAN notified.
06/02/2004	-	Subpoena – Business Records returned, residence service , left with Agent/Officer – as to SHAWNEE COUNTY SHERIFF’S OFFICE 05/28/04 . Served by 0391. Entered by 1125.
06/02/2004	-	( JUDY FORESTER )
06/03/2004	-	Order to Release Business Records signed. deb
06/03/2004	-	ORDER TO RELEASE BUSINESS RECORDS PRODUCED BY SHAWNEE CO SHERIFFS DEPT TO GEORGE MARTIN, HOFFMAN & HOFFMAN LAW OFFICE – DEB
06/04/2004	-	Memorandum received from Amanda Smith Wilson.
06/04/2004	-	RESPONSE OF RESPONDENT TO THE LETTERS TO THE COURT OF DR. ALBOTT AND CASE MANAGER LLOYD SWARTZ, RESPECTIVELY SENT MAY 26, 2004 AND MAY 7, 2004 FILED BY FAX
06/07/2004	-	LETTER DECISION FILED. DEB
06/10/2004	-	LETTER FROM LLOYD C SWARTZ TO LEONARD ROBINSON & DONALD HOFFMAN DATED 04/01/04.
06/10/2004	-	LETTER FROM DONALD R HOFFMAN TO LLOYD SCHWARTZ DATED 04/27/04.
06/14/2004	-	LETTER FROM CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI TO JUDGE BRUNS DATED 06/14/04.
06/16/2004	-	#67 Motion filed and entered by CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI, PRO SE, FOR REQUEST FOR EMERGENCY STATUS CONFERENCE OR TO REINSTATE UPON ORDER UNSUPERVIED PARENTING TIME. Filed by fax
06/21/2004	-	Order to Release Business Records signed. deb
06/21/2004	-	ORDER TO RELEASE BUSINESS RECORDS PRODUCED BY SHAWNEE COUNTY SHERIFF’S OFFICE TO CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI – DEB
06/23/2004	-	ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS TO BE ENTERED INTO THE COURTS RECORDS
06/24/2004	-	ORDER APPOINTING GUARDIAN AD LITEM, JILL DYKES – DEB
06/24/2004	-	LETTER DECISION FILED. DEB
06/28/2004	-	POST OFFICE RETURNED AN ORDER TO REINSTATE UNSUPERVISED PARENTING TIME THAT JUDGE DID NOT SIGN BECAUSE OF A BAD ADDRESS FOR CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI
06/29/2004	-	LETTER FROM CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI TO JUDGE BRUNS DATED 06/29/04.
07/01/2004	-	LETTER FROM FELICIA THEEL TO JILL DYKES DATED 07/01/04.
07/11/2004	-	#69 Motion filed and entered by CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI, PRO SE, FOR EXPEDITED ENFORCEMENT OF VISITATION RIGHTS
07/13/2004	-	Order Allowing And Assessing Fee signed. deb
07/13/2004	-	PETITION AND ORDER FOR ALLOWANCE AND ASSESSMENT OF COURT- APPOINTED ATTORNEY FEES FILED – DEB
07/29/2004	-	LETTER FROM CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI TO JUDGE BRUNS DATED 07/29/04.
07/30/2004	-	LETTER DECISION FILED. DEB
08/04/2004	-	LETTER FROM LLOYD C SWARTZ TO PETITIONER & RESP DATED 08/02/04.
08/13/2004	-	LETTER FROM CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI TO JUDGE BRUNS DATED 08/12/04.
08/27/2004	-	LETTER DECISION FILED. DEB
09/03/2004	-	LETTER FROM M JILL DYKES TO JUDGE BRUNS DATED 08/31/04.
09/18/2004	-	LETTER FROM CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI TO LLOYD SWARTZ DATED 09/17/04. FILED BY FAX.
10/01/2004	-	Transfered from Div.12 to Div.05, New Judicial Assignment.
10/01/2004	-	LETTER FROM LLOYD C SWARTZ TO HAL RICHARDSON & CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI DATED 093004.
10/08/2004	-	LETTER FROM LLOYD C SWARTZ TO PARENTS DATED 10/07/04.
10/08/2004	-	LETTER FROM LLOYD C SWARTZ TO PARENTS DATED 09/30/04.
10/28/2004	-	LETTER FROM CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI TO MR. SWARTZ DATED 10/28/04. FILED BY FAX.
11/01/2004	-	LETTER FROM LLOYD C SWARTZ TO PARENTS DATED 10/29/04.
11/08/2004	-	LETTER FROM LLOYD C SWARTZ TO PARENTS DATED 10/29/04.
12/02/2004	-	Recommendation of Domestic Case Manager, November 2004, ORDERS of the Court signed. EZW.
12/06/2004	-	LETTER FROM CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI TO JUDGE WILSON DATED 12/06/04. FILED BY FAX.
12/17/2004	-	RECOMMENDATION OF DOMESTIC CASE MANAGER AND ORDER FILED-EZW
01/07/2005	-	SET – Hearing on 03/03/05 at 09:00AM. in division 05. STATUS CONFERENCE
01/07/2005	-	Notice of hearing for 03/03/05 Hearing issued .
02/09/2005	-	Notice of termination of assignment of support rights filed IV-D AFDC.
03/03/2005	-	LETTER FROM CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI TO JUDGE WILSON DATED 03/03/05.
03/03/2005	-	Ct.Rptr:TAYLOR (SHC050303-081110).Petitioner appears and by DONALD R.HOFFMAN; Respondent appears pro se; Rikki appears not but by JILL DYKES, GAL. Also appearing: LLOYD SWARTZ, CM. Status Conf.-Resp.directed to provide current contact info.to C.M., to include physical address, phone number. -Resp.directed to inform C.M. of intent to file Motions before filing them with Court to get C.M.okay to file them with Court. -Resp’s request to remove C.M. and GAL is denied. -Court makes no changes to current orders except as set forth above. Resp’s parenting time with child will remain supervised at this time. -GAL’s request for fees granted. Advanced by County. Parties shall submit income statements to C.M., who will send court a recommendation as to assessment of fees to the parties.(cont’d.next screen)
03/03/2005	-	(cont’d.from previous screen) DYKES will journalize. EZW,Div.5.
03/10/2005	-	Order Allowing and Assessing Fee signed. EZW,Div.5.
03/11/2005	-	PETITION FOR ALLOWANCE AND ASSESSMENT OF COURT APPOINTED GUARDIAN AD LITEM FEES AND ORDER ALLOWING AND ASSESSING FEE FILED – EZW (Sent Certified Copy to Ct Admin Office)
03/15/2005	-	LETTER FROM LLOYD C SWARTZ TO JUDGE WILSON DATED 03/14/05.
03/17/2005	-	NOTICE PURSUANT TO SUPREME COURT RULE 170 FILED BY M. JILL DYKES
03/18/2005	-	LETTER FROM CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI TO JUDGE WILSON DATED 03/18/05. FILED BY FAX.
04/24/2005	-	LETTER FROM CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI TO LLOYD C SWARTZ DATED 04/19/05. FILED BY FAX.
05/03/2005	-	Journal Entry signed. EZW,Div.5.
05/03/2005	-	LETTER FROM CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI TO LLOYD SWARTZ DATED 05/03/05. FILED BY FAX.
05/03/2005	-	Journal Entry filed. EZW
05/23/2005	-	OBJECTION TO THE CASE MANAGER RECOMMENDATION DATED MAY 11, 2005. FILED BY FAX.
06/28/2005	-	Filed by Fax – LETTER FROM CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI TO SAFE VISIT STAFF DATED 060705.
07/18/2005	-	RECEIVED BY FAX A MOTION TO MODIFY CUSTODY AND VISITATION ON 07/13/05 FROM CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI. THIS IS BEING RETURNED TO HER BECAUSE THE $26.00 MOTION FILING FEE WAS NOT PAID.
07/19/2005	-	$26.00 Cash recd from DOMBROWSKI,CLAUDINE,, (21.00 DM POST DIVORCE MOT; 5.00 DM Surcharge)
07/19/2005	-	#70 Motion filed and entered by CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI PRO SE, TO MODIFY CUSTODY AND VISITATION
07/19/2005	-	Order signed. EZW,Div.5.
07/20/2005	-	SET – Hearing on 10/25/05 at 02:00PM. in division 05. Special Setting, set by Court.
07/20/2005	-	ORDER- 1)TERMINATING CASE MANAGEMENT; 2)DENYING RESPONDENT’S MOTION TO DISMISS M JILL DYKES AS GUARDIAN AD LITEM; 3)DISMISSING RESPONDENT’S (A) MOTION FOR CHANGE OF RESIDENCY AND (B) MOTION TO MODIFIY CUSTODY AND VISITATION FOR FAILURE TO PROVIDE VERIFIED AFFIDAVIT; AND 4)SETTING A HEARING FOR RESPONDENT’S REQUEST FOR MODIFICATION OF PARENTING TIME-EZW
08/26/2005	-	DIVORCEWORKS Certificate of Completion for CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI.
09/13/2005	-	ENTRY OF APPEARANCE FILED BY BETHANY J ROBERTS AS ATTORNEY FOR CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI
09/27/2005	-	Notice of hearing for 10/25/05 Hearing issued .
10/25/2005	-	Ct.Rptr:TAYLOR. Pet.appears and by D.R.HOFFMAN; Resp.appears and by B.J.ROBERTS; JILL DYKES, GAL, also appears. Hearing on Motion to Modify P.T. Court rules: 1)P.T. will remain supervised thru Safe Visit; 1x/week from 4pm-5pm on Sunday; 2)Resp.may have unsupervised T.C. w/minor on Tues.and Fri. evevning at 8pm for 1/2 hour. Resp.will initiate call. 3)Resp.and minor into Fam.Therapy as selected by GAL, Resp. to pay for it. 4)Review hearing set for 2/2/06 at 9am. 2 hours. ROBERTS to prepare JE. EZW,Div.5.
10/26/2005	-	SET – Hearing on 02/02/06 at 09:00AM. in division 05. REVIEW HEARING – 2 Hours Allowed.
10/26/2005	-	Notice of hearing for 02/02/06 Hearing issued .
10/28/2005	-	Order Allowing and Assessing Fee signed. EZW,Div.5.
11/01/2005	-	PETITION FOR ALLOWANCE AND ASSESSMENT OF COURT APPOINTED ATTORNEY FEES AND ORDER ALLOWING AND ASSESSING FEES FILED – EZW (Sent Certified Copy to Ct Admin Office)
11/16/2005	-	Journal Entry (Motion to Modify Parenting Time) signed. EZW,Div.5.
11/21/2005	-	JOURNAL ENTRY FILED – EZW
01/30/2006	-	Case transfered Div 05 to Div 04,New Judicial Assignment.NEP
02/03/2006	-	ORDERDED HOME STUDY FOR PETITIONER’S HOME,PARTIES ORDERED TO CONTACT COUNSELOR FOR MINOR CHILD AND REPORT TO THE COURT PR IOR TO NEXT HEARING. CREDENTIALS FOR THE THERAPIST(MS BROWN) TO BE SUBMITTED TO THE COURT. SAFE VISITS TO CONTINUE ALONG WITH ALL OTHER PREVIOUS ORDERS UNTIL NEXT HEARING. ATTORNEY ROBERTS TO JOURNALIZE THE HEARING.JDJ
02/14/2006	-	JOURNAL ENTRY FILED – JDJ
03/03/2006	-	SET – Hearing on 04/10/06 at 10:30AM. in division 04.
03/03/2006	-	Notice of hearing for 04/10/06 Hearing issued .
03/14/2006	-	NOTICE OF ATTORNEY CONFERENCE FILED
03/14/2006	-	SET – Counsel Conference on 04/14/06 at 10:00AM. in division 04.
04/14/2006	-	PARTIES PRESENT AND THROUGH COUNSEL. RESPONDENT APPEARED PERSONALLY. GAL, JILL DYKES APPEARED ON BEHALF OF MINOR CHILD. COURT ORDERED THAT SAFE VISITS ARE TO CONTINUE. RESPONDENT ORDERED TO RECEIVE AN EVALUATION THROUGH FAMILY SERVICES AND GUIDANCE CENTER. MATTER PLACED BACK ON THE STATUS DOCKET FOR AUG 9@9AM.JDJ
04/14/2006	-	SET – Status Docket on 08/09/06 at 09:00AM. in division 04.
04/14/2006	-	Notice of hearing for 08/09/06 Status Docket issued .
05/09/2006	-	JOURNAL ENTRY REGARDING PARENTING TIME SIGNED BY JDJ
05/09/2006	-	Journal Entry filed. JDJ
06/12/2006	-	#71Emergency Motion filed and entered by CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI PRO SE FOR ORDER TO ALLOW GRANDPARENT VISITATION EMERGENCY ORDER.
06/13/2006	-	#72 MOTION FILED BY BETHANY J ROBERTS TO WITHDRAW AS COUNSEL OF RECORD FOR RESPONDENT
06/14/2006	-	SET – Motion Docket on 07/27/06 at 09:30AM. in division 04.
06/14/2006	-	Notice of Hearing on MOTION DOCKET. Hearing date July 27, 2006 09:30AM.
06/14/2006	-	PETITIONER’S RESPOSNE AND OBJECTION TO RESPONDENT’S EMERGENCY MOTION FOR ORDER TO ALLOW GRANDPARENT VISITATION EMERGENCY ORDER FILED
06/27/2006	-	Order for withdrawal of attorney, BETHANY J ROBERTS – JDJ
07/24/2006	-	TAKEN OUT OF SETTING ON 8/9
07/25/2006	-	CORRECTED CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
08/31/2006	-	LETTER FROM CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI TO JUDGE JOHNSON DATED 08/31/06.
09/07/2006	-	SET – Status Docket on 10/16/06 at 02:00PM. in division 04.
09/07/2006	-	Notice of hearing for 10/16/06 Status Docket issued .
09/13/2006	-	SET – Status Docket on 09/27/06 at 11:30AM. in division 04. THE HEARING IN THIS MATTER HAS BEEN ADVANCED TO SEPTEMBER 27, 2006@ 11:30 A.M. COUNSEL, IF YOU DISCOVER THIS SETTING CONFLICTS WITH YOUR CALENDAR, PLEASE CONTACT OUR OFFICE.
09/13/2006	-	Notice of hearing for 09/27/06 Status Docket issued .
09/27/2006	-	PETITIONER APPEARS IN PERSON AND THROUGH COUNSEL, MR. DON HOFFMAN. RESPONDENT APPEARS IN PERSON, PRO SE. THE CHILD APPEARS THROUGH THE G.A.L., MS. DYKES. THE COURT ORDERED THE RESPONDENT TO COMPLY WITH THE PREVIOUS ORDER TO GET AN EVALUATION COMPLETED AT FAMILY SERVICE & GUIDANCE CENTER. CHILD’S PICTURE TO BE REMOVED FROM MOTHER’S WEBSITE. CHILD TO BE AVAILABLE ON WEDS & SUNDAYS AT 7PM FOR CALLS FROM MOTHER. ALL VISITS BY MOTHER WILL BE THROUGH SAFE VISITS UNTIL FURTHER ORDER OF THE COURT. MATTER CONTINUED FOR 30 DAYS FOR COMPLIANCE. JDJ
09/27/2006	-	PSYCH. EVALS/ASSESSMENTS/RECORDS FILED
09/27/2006	-	JOURNAL ENTRY ORDER FILED – JDJ
09/28/2006	-	RECEIPT AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT FILED
10/10/2006	-	PETITION FOR ALLOWANCE AND ASSESSMENT OF COURT-APPOINTED ATTORNEY FEES AND ORDER FILED – JDJ (CERTIFIED COPY SENT TO COURT ADMIN)
11/01/2006	-	#73 Motion filed and entered by CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI,PRO SE TO RESTORE PARENTING TIME.
11/01/2006	-	POVERTY AFFIDAVIT SIGNED BY CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI
01/29/2007	-	LETTER FROM CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI TO JUDGE JOHNSON DATED
01/29/2007	-	01/24/07. Filed by Fax
02/07/2007	-	SET – Hearing on 04/04/07 at 02:00PM. in division 04. *PLEASE BE ADVISED THAT THIS IS AN AMENDED NOTICE OF HEARING** DISREGARD ANY PREVIOUS NOTICES
02/07/2007	-	Notice of hearing for 04/04/07 Hearing issued .
04/04/2007	-	PARTIES PRESENT AND WITH COUNSEL. MS. DYKES FOR THE PARTIES MINOR CHILD. THE COURT ORDERED MS. DOMBROWSKI TO MEET WITH MS. CYNTHIA TURNBULL FOR EVALUATION. MR. HOFFMAN IS TO JOURNALIZE. JDJ
04/11/2007	-	LETTER FROM CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI TO JUDGE JOHNSON DATED 04/10/07.
05/21/2007	-	LETTER FROM CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI TO JUDGE JOHNSON DATED 05/21/07.
06/15/2007	-	JOURNAL ENTRY OF 4/4/07 HEARING SIGNED BY JDJ
06/15/2007	-	JOURNAL ENTRY FILED – JDJ
06/29/2007	-	LETTER FROM JENNIFER OLSEN TO DONALD R HOFFMAN DATED 06/29/07.
07/11/2007	-	LETTER FROM ATTORNEY GENERAL TO DISTRICT COURT DATED 07/10/07.
07/23/2007	-	LETTER FROM CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI TO JUDGE JOHNSON DATED 07/23/07.
07/26/2007	-	COPY OF LETTER FROM SAFE VISIT ADMINISTRATOR TO JUDGE JOHNSON DATED 06/15/07 COPY OF LETTER FROM SAFE VISIT ADMINISTRATOR TO HAL RICHARDSON AND CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI DATED 07/24/07
08/06/2007	-	Transcript of HEARING, held 04/04/07 filed.
08/30/2007	-	EXPEDITED JUDICIAL PROCESS FILED
09/12/2007	-	SET – Review Hearing on 11/07/07 at 11:00AM. in division 04.
09/12/2007	-	Notice of hearing for 11/07/07 Review Hearing issued .
09/19/2007	-	FORMAL OBJECTION TO ANY THIRD PARTY INTERFERANCE AT SAFE VISIT FILED
09/20/2007	-	#74 Motion filed and entered by M JILL DYKES as GUARDIAN AD LITEM TO ALLOW DOCTOR TO OBSERVE SAFE VISIT
09/20/2007	-	ORDER ALLOWING DOCTOR TO OBSERVE SAFE VISIT FILED – JDJ
10/25/2007	-	LETTER FROM MARY ANN DUGAN TO JUDGE JOHNSON DATED 11/17/06.
11/07/2007	-	PETITIONER PRESENT AND THROUGH COUNSEL, JASON HOFFMAN FOR DON HOFFMAN. RESPONDENT MOVED TO RECUSE THE G.A.L. SAID MOTION WAS DENIED. RESPONDENT WAS ORDERED TO CONTACT MS. TURNBULL CONCERNING PSYCH EVALUATION AND TO SCHEDULE THE SAME. UPON SCHEDULING THE G.A.L. WILL BE ADVISED. PHONE CALLS WILL BE ON SUNDAY AND WEDNESDAYS FROM 5:30-6:30P.M. THE PHOLE WILL NOT BE ON AT ANY OTHER TIME. JDJ
11/09/2007	-	PETITION FOR ALLOWANCE AND ASSESSMENT OF COURT-APPOINTED ATTORNEY/GUARDIAN AD LITEM FEES FILED AND ORDER ALLOWING AND ASSESSING FEE FILED – JDJ (CERTIFIED COPY TO CRT ADMIN)
11/16/2007	-	AMENDED PETITION FOR ALLOWANCE AND ASSESSMENT OF COURT-APPOINTED ATTORNEY/GUARDIAN AD LITEM FEES FILED
11/16/2007	-	LETTER FROM CYNTHIA TURNBULL PHD TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN DATED 11/12/07
11/27/2007	-	LETTER FROM M. JILL DYKES TO JUDGE JOHNSON DATED 11/12/07.
11/27/2007	-	Filed by Fax
12/16/2007	-	LETTER FROM CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI TO JUDGE JOHNSON DATED 12/13/07.
01/03/2008	-	LETTER FROM CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI DATED 01/03/08
01/03/2008	-	Filed by Fax
01/15/2008	-	LETTER FROM CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI TO JUDGE JOHNSON DATED 01/15/08.
02/04/2008	-	#75 Motion filed and entered by CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI,PRO SE FOR IMMEDIATE ORDER RESTORING AND REINSTATING WITHOUT RESTRICTION CHILD AND PARENT ACCESS. A VIOLATION OF THE CIVIL AND CONSTITUIONAL RIGHTS OF BOTH CHILD & PARENT. Filed by Fax
02/13/2008	-	#76 Motion filed and entered by DONALD R HOFFMAN for HAL RICHARDSON FOR ORDER TO APPEAR & SHOW CAUSE.
02/14/2008	-	SET – Show Cause on 03/13/08 at 01:30PM. in division 04.
02/14/2008	-	Notice of hearing for 03/13/08 Show Cause issued .
02/19/2008	-	Filed by fax – RESPONSE TO SHOW CAUSE MOTION
02/28/2008	-	REQUEST FOR CONTINUANCE/ADVANCEMENT & ORDER GRANTING CONTINUANCE/ADVANCEMENT FILED – JDJ.
02/29/2008	-	SET – Show Cause on 04/25/08 at 11:30AM. in division 04.
03/20/2008	-	Three Praecipes for Subpoena/Subpoena Duces Tecum filed by CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI, PRO SE.
03/20/2008	-	Subpoena issued personal service returnable 04/25/08 11:30A.M. as to MICHAEL L BURLISON
03/20/2008	-	Subpoena Duces Tecum issued personal service returnable 04/25/08 11:30A.M. as to DR DAVID RODEHFFER
03/20/2008	-	Subpoena Duces Tecum issued personal service returnable 04/25/08 11:30A.M. as to DR WILLIAM ALBOTT
03/20/2008	-	Sheriff Process Fee ($10.00 cash) received and forwarded.
03/27/2008	-	Subpoena Duces Tecum returned, residence service, left with Agent/Officer – as to DR DAVID RODEHFFER 03/25/08 . Entered by 1153.
03/27/2008	-	Subpoena Duces Tecum returned, residence service, left with Agent/Officer – as to DR WILLIAM ALBOTT 03/25/08 . Entered by 1153.
03/28/2008	-	Subpoena returned, personal service – as to MICHAEL L BURLISON 03/27/08 . Entered by 0148.
04/02/2008	-	#77 Emergency Motion filed and entered by CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI, PRO SE, FOR IMMEDIATE INTERVENTION OF THIS COURT FOR THE HEALTH AND BEST INTEREST OF MINOR CHILD.Filed by fax
04/03/2008	-	SET – Motion Docket on 04/24/08 at 10:30AM. in division 04.
04/03/2008	-	Notice of Hearing on MOTION DOCKET. Hearing date April 24, 2008 10:30AM.
04/03/2008	-	#78 Emergency Motion filed and entered by CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI, PRO SE, FOR DEMAND RULING. Filed by fax
04/04/2008	-	HEARING SET FOR 4-24-08 ON RESPONDENTS MOTIONS HAS BEEN CONSLIDATED WITH HEARING ON 4-25-08 AT 11:30 A.M.
04/25/2008	-	PETITIONER PRESENT AND WITH COUNSEL, MR. HOFFMAN. RESPONDENT APPEARED PRO SE. THE G.A.L. MS DYKES ON BEHALF OF THE CHILD. MATTER BEFORE THE COURT PURSUANT TO THE RESPONDENT’S MOTION TO RESTORE ACCESS TO THE CHILD. THE G.A.L. GAVE HER REPORT TO THE COURT FAVORING AN ALTERNATIVE TO THE SAFE VISITS THAT ARE PRESENTLY ONGOING. THE MATTER WAS ALSO BEFORE THE COURT PURSUANT TO THE PETITIONER’S MOTION FOR ORDER TO APPEAR AND SHOW CAUSE. THE RESPONDENT’S MOTION WAS SUSTAINED.THE PAR- TIES WILL BE PLACED IN THE ODYESSY PROGRAM. THE PARTIES WILL PARTICIPATE IN THE PROGRAM’S VISITATION AND THERAPY COMPO- NENTS. THE RESPONDENT’S MOTION WAS SUSTAINED FOR CHANGE OF VISITATION WITH THE MINOR CHILD. JDJ
06/18/2008	-	FAXED LETTER FROM CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI TO JUDGE JOHNSON DATED 06/18/08.
08/25/2008	-	Case transfered Div 04 to Div 13,New Judicial Assignment.NEP
10/15/2008	-	POVERTY AFFIDAVIT SIGNED BY CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI
10/15/2008	-	#79 EMERGENCY Motion filed and entered by CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI, PRO SE, FOR ORDERS OF JUSTICE
10/17/2008	-	SET – Motion Docket on 11/13/08 at 09:30AM. in division 13.
10/17/2008	-	Notice of Hearing on MOTION DOCKET. Hearing date November 13, 2008 09:30AM.
10/28/2008	-	#80 Motion filed and entered by CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI,PRO SE, FOR TEMPORARY ORDER ALLOWING MINOR CHILD TO ATTEND HER GRANDMOTHERS FUNERAL. Filed by fax
10/30/2008	-	SET – Motion Docket on 11/04/08 at 03:30PM. in division 13.
10/30/2008	-	Notice of hearing for 11/04/08 Motion Docket issued .
11/04/2008	-	Petitioner in person and by Don Hoffman. Respondent in person, Pro Se. Court Reporter: Digital Div. 13. Court hears from counsel and denies Respondent’s motion. Court schedules Respondent’s emergency motion for orders of justice for December 16, 2008 at 1:30 p.m. DBD
11/04/2008	-	SET – Hearing on 12/16/08 at 01:30PM. in division 13. Motion Hearing
11/04/2008	-	Notice of hearing for 12/16/08 Hearing issued .
11/05/2008	-	NOTICE OF SERVICE OF ORDER PURSUANT TO SUPREME COURT RULE 170 FILED BY DONALD HOFFMAN
11/07/2008	-	REQUEST FOR TRANSCRIPT FILED BY: CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI
11/13/2008	-	LETTER FROM DOROTHY SEEL, MANAGING REPORTER TO CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI DATED 11/13/08.
11/21/2008	-	JOURNAL ENTRY FILED – DBD
12/04/2008	-	EIGHT PRAECIPE FOR BUSINESS RECORDS SUBPOENA DUCES TECUM FILED BY CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI, PRO SE
12/05/2008	-	Subpoena Duces Tecum-Business Records issued personal servic returnable 12/16/08 01:30P.M. as to JUDGE DAVID E BRUNS
12/05/2008	-	Subpoena Duces Tecum-Business Records issued personal servic returnable 12/16/08 01:30P.M. as to DREX FLOTT LSCSW CLINICAL DIRECTOR
12/05/2008	-	Subpoena Duces Tecum-Business Records issued personal servic returnable 12/16/08 01:30P.M. as to M JILL DYKES
12/05/2008	-	Subpoena Duces Tecum-Business Records issued personal servic returnable 12/16/08 01:30P.M. as to KARA HARRY DIRECT THERAPEUTIC SUPPORT
12/05/2008	-	Subpoena Duces Tecum-Business Records issued personal servic returnable 12/16/08 01:30P.M. as to LLOYD SWARTZ
12/05/2008	-	Subpoena Duces Tecum-Business Records issued personal servic returnable 12/16/08 01:30P.M. as to DR WILLIAM ALBOTT
12/05/2008	-	Subpoena Duces Tecum-Business Records issued personal servic returnable 12/16/08 01:30P.M. as to DR DAVID RODEHFFER
12/05/2008	-	Subpoena Duces Tecum-Business Records issued personal servic returnable 12/16/08 01:30P.M. as to CONNIE SANCHEZ
12/09/2008	-	$57.00 Cash recd from DOMBROWSKI,CLAUDINE,, (57.00 DM Transcrpt)
12/12/2008	-	Subpoena Duces Tecum-Business Records returned, residence service, left with Agent/Officer – as to DR WILLIAM ALBOTT 12/10/08 . Entered by 1153.
12/12/2008	-	Subpoena Duces Tecum-Business Records returned, residence service, left with Agent/Officer – as to DR DAVID RODEHFFER 12/10/08 . Entered by 1153.
12/12/2008	-	Subpoena Duces Tecum-Business Records returned, personal service – as to CONNIE SANCHEZ 12/10/08 . Entered by 0883.
12/12/2008	-	LETTER FROM JUDGE BRUNS TO JUDGE DEBENHAM DATED 12/12/08.
12/15/2008	-	Subpoena Duces Tecum-Business Records returned, residence service, left with Agent/Officer – as to JUDGE DAVID E BRUNS 12/11/08 . Entered by 0885.
12/15/2008	-	Subpoena Duces Tecum-Business Records returned, personal service – as to DREX FLOTT LSCSW CLINICAL DIRECTOR 12/11/08 . Entered by 1128.
12/15/2008	-	Subpoena Duces Tecum-Business Records returned, personal service – as to KARA HARRY DIRECT THERAPEUTIC SUPPORT 12/11/08 . Entered by 1128.
12/15/2008	-	Subpoena Duces Tecum-Business Records returned, personal service – as to LLOYD SWARTZ 12/11/08 . Entered by 0885.
12/16/2008	-	MISC. Petitioner in person and by counsel, Donald Hoffman; G.A.L. Jill Dykes in person; Respondent in person, Pro Se. Court Reporter: Digital Div. 13. Court hears evidence and arguments of parties and denies Respondent’s motion as it is unsupported by the evidence introduced by Respondent. Based on evidence put on by Respondent, it is clear that it is in the best interest of the child to leave parenting time as it is presently set and in a supervised fashion. Any further motions filed by Respondent will need to specify factual allegations and legal conclusions to support the motion or the Court will entertain motions to dismiss the same. Donald Hoffman to prepare JE. DBD
12/16/2008	-	REQUEST FOR TRANSCRIPT FILED BY: CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI
12/22/2008	-	Subpoena Duces Tecum-Business Records returned personal service requested, no service, no response to notes left – as to M JILL DYKES 12/18/08 . Entered by 0572.
12/23/2008	-	LETTER FROM DOROTHY SEEL, MANAGING REPORTER TO CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI DATED 12/23/08.
12/29/2008	-	NOTICE OF SERVICE OF ORDER PURSUANT TO SUPREME COURT RULE 170 FILED BY DONALD HOFFMAN
12/29/2008	-	EXPEDITED JUDICIAL PROCESS FILED BY FAX
01/14/2009	-	PETITION FOR ALLOWANCE AND ASSESSMENT OF COURT-APPOINTED ATTORNEY/GUARDIAN AD LITEM FEES & ORDER ALLOWING AND ASSESSING FEE FILED – DBD. (Sent Certified Copy to Ct Admin Office)
01/27/2009	-	#81 Motion filed and entered by CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI,PRO SE, FOR COURT TO BE IN COMPLIANCE WITH CURRENT FEDERAL, STATE AND KANSAS APPEALLATE RULINGS IN THAT THE LAST OF ORDER OF THIS COURT (DECEMBER 16, 2008) IS IN DIRECT VIOLATION OF AND DEMANDS THE COURT TO CORRECT ITS ILLEGAL RULING IMMEDIATELY AND TAKE ANY ALL FURTHER STEPS TO BE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE CURRENT LAWS SETFORTH
01/27/2009	-	Filed by Fax
01/27/2009	-	#82 Motion filed and entered by DONALD R HOFFMAN for HAL RICHARDSON, FOR ORDER TO APPEAR & SHOW CAUSE
02/13/2009	-	$213.00 Cash recd from DOMBROWSKI,CLAUDINE,, (213.00 DM Transcrpt)
02/24/2009	-	SET – Hearing on 03/17/09 at 01:00PM. in division 13. (hearing to determine if Respondent needs appointed counsel) (1/2 hour)
02/24/2009	-	Notice of hearing for 03/17/09 Hearing issued .
02/24/2009	-	SET – Motion Hearing on 04/06/09 at 01:30PM. in division 13. (1/2 day)
02/24/2009	-	ORDER TO APPEAR AND SHOW CAUSE FILED – DBD.
02/24/2009	-	AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR ORDER TO APPEAR & SHOW CAUSE FILED.
02/24/2009	-	Praecipe for Summons filed by DONALD R HOFFMAN.
02/25/2009	-	MOTION/AFFIDAVIT SHOW CAUSE & ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE issued as to CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI personal service issued to special process server.
03/13/2009	-	POVERTY AFFIDAVIT SIGNED BY CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI
03/13/2009	-	#83 Motion filed and entered by CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI, PRO SE, FOR ORDERS OF JUSTICE
03/13/2009	-	VERIFIED AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR JUSTICE FILED
03/13/2009	-	#84 Motion filed and entered by CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI, PRO SE, FOR JUDGE DAVID DEBENHAM TO RECUSE HIMSELF FOR VIOATIONS OF CANNONS ONE THROUGH THREE
03/13/2009	-	VERIFIED AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR JUDGE DAVID DEBENHAM TO RECUSE FOR VIOATIONS OF CANNONS ONE THROUGH THREE FILED
03/13/2009	-	#85 Motion filed and entered by CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI, PRO SE, FOR COURT TO BE IN COMPLIANCE WITH CURRENT FEDERAL, STATE AND KANSAS APPEALLATE RULINGS IN THAT THE LAST OF ORDER OF THIS COURT (DECEMBER 16, 2008) IS IN DIRECT VIOLATION OF AND DEMANDS THE COURT TO CORRECT ITS ILLEGAL RULING IMMEDIATELY AND TAKE ANY ALL FURTHER STEPS TO BE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE CURRENT LAWS SETFORTH
03/17/2009	-	MISC. Petitioner in person and by Donald Hoffman. Respondent does not appear. Court Reporter: Digital Div. 13. Court finds Respondent’s Motion to Recuse was improperly filed but after consideration denies the Motion for Recusal. On evidence presented Court finds Respondent was personally served with Motion and Order to Appear and Show Cause scheduled for April 6, 2009, at 1:30 p.m. pursuant to K.S.A. 60-303(d)(4). Court appoints Kevin Cook to represent Respondent during hearing scheduled on show cause order. Court denies Respondent’s motion filed 12/29/08 titled, “Expedited Judicial Process”, Motion #81, Motion #83, and Motion #85, as none of the motions have alleged any new information or basis for overturning Court’s December 16, 2008, decision. Court will journalize order. DBD
03/18/2009	-	ORDER FILED – DBD.
03/20/2009	-	#86 Demand Motion filed and entered by CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI, PRO SE, FOR JUDGE DAVID DEBENHAM TO RECUSE HIMSELF FOR VIOATIONS OF CANNONS ONE THROUGH THREE BIAS AND PREJUDICE TOWARDS RESPONDENT
03/20/2009	-	Journal Entry filed. DBD
03/24/2009	-	ORDER APPOINTING COUNSEL FILED – DBD.
04/06/2009	-	MISC. Petitioner in person and by Donald Hoffman. Respondent in person and by Robert E. Duncan. G.A.L., Jill Dykes, for minor child who is not present. Court Reporter: Digital Div. 13. Respondent withdraws motion for recusal of Judge. Court considers evidence offered through affidavit and stipulations of the parties and after listening to arguments of counsel, finds that Judge Johnson on September 27, 2006, ordered “Respondent to withdraw any and all likenesses of the minor child over which she had control that may be appearing on the internet or other public places or public access and further that Respondent was ordered not to present child at public rallies, demonstrations, newscast or otherwise publicize the child’s name or likeness in furtherance of Respondent’s efforts in the instant case”. Court found 1) based on incidents detailed in the affidavit and the stipulations of the parties that Respondent had violated the Court’s order by intentionally placing photographs of the minor child on Respondent’s website and to links accessible through the Respondent’s website and to websites that the Respondent was either maintaining or contributing to; 2) that as of April 4, 2009, the photographs of the minor child were still accessible; 3) that as of April 6, 2009, the photographs were not accessible. Court finds Respondent to be in Indirect Contempt. In mitogation, Respondent offers that photos were part of a family tribute to her deceased grandmother. Court fines Respondent $1,500 and orders her to serve 30 days in jail. Court allows Respondent to purge herself of the contempt by removing all photos, likenesses and name of minor child from the internet or any other public place or public access on which she has control by April 15, 2009, at 3:00 p.m. Respondent is ordered to pay Petitioner’s attorney fees of $600 for prosecuting the motion to show cause, Respondent is ordered to obtain a psychological evaluation by a Psychiatrist. Respondent is prohibited from filing any motions on her own unless the motion is signed by her attorney or she obtains permission of the Court prior to filing. Parenting time as previously ordered – 2 hours supervised visitation per week through Odyssey Group. Respondent currently has a P.O. Box and does not wish to disclose her address. Court ordered, and Respondent agrees, that any filing mailed to her P.O. Box shall be deemed personal service. R. Duncan to do JE. DBD
04/24/2009	-	REQUEST FOR TRANSCRIPT FILED BY: CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI
04/28/2009	-	LETTER FROM DOROTHY SEEL,COURT REPORTER TO CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI DATED 04/28/09.
05/22/2009	-	LETTER FROM JUDGE DEBENHAM TO ROBERT DUNCAN II DATED 05/22/09.
06/16/2009	-	Transcript of HEARING, held 04/06/09 filed.
06/29/2009	-	LETTER FROM JUDGE DEBENHAM TO ROBERT DUNCAN II DATED 06/29/09.
08/28/2009	-	$52.00 Check recd from DOMBROWSKI,CLAUDINE,, (42.00 DM POST DIVORCE MOT; 10.00 DM Surcharge)
08/28/2009	-	#87 Motion filed and entered by ROBERT E DUNCAN II for CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI, TO MODIFY VISITATION AND TO PROVIDE FOR ORTHODONTIC CARE AND MODIFICATION OF SUPPORT
08/28/2009	-	SET – Motion Docket on 09/17/09 at 10:30AM. in division 13.
08/28/2009	-	Notice of Hearing on MOTION DOCKET. Hearing date September 17, 2009 10:30AM.
09/17/2009	-	MISC. MOTION DOCKET. Petitioner in person and by Don Hoffman. Respondent in person and by Robert E. Duncan, II. G.A.L. Jill Dykes present. Court Reporter: Digital Div. 13. 1) Parties agree that Petitioner will have child looked at by 2 other orthodontist within 60 days and share estimates of cost with Respondent; 2) Both parties are responsible for half of all orthodontic care for the minor child; 3) Parties are to exchange MDRA within 10 days; 4) Respondent to file amended motion to modify visitation with counsel’s signature; 5) Both parties ordered to provide U.A.’s today; and 6) Hearing set for 11/13/09 at 11:00 a.m. on supervised parenting time. R. Duncan to do JE. DBD
09/17/2009	-	SET – Motion Hearing on 11/13/09 at 11:00AM. in division 13.
09/17/2009	-	Notice of hearing for 11/13/09 Motion Hearing issued .
09/18/2009	-	ORDER FILED – DBD.
10/16/2009	-	#88 Motion filed and entered by DONALD R HOFFMAN for HAL RICHARDSON, FOR ORDER TO APPEAR & SHOW CAUSE
10/16/2009	-	AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR ORDER TO APPEAR & SHOW CAUSE FILED
10/22/2009	-	Praecipe for Summons filed by DONALD R HOFFMAN.
10/23/2009	-	MOTION/AFFIDAVIT & ORDER TO APPEARS & SHOW CAUSE issued as to CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI personal service issued to special process server.
11/09/2009	-	RESPONSE TO ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE FILED
11/09/2009	-	Filed by Fax
11/13/2009	-	MISC. Petitioner in person and by Don Hoffman. Respondent in person and by Robert E. Duncan, II. G.A.L., Jill Dykes, in person. Court Reporter: Digital Div. 13. Matter comes before Court on Respondent’s motion for unsupervised visitation and Petitioner’s motion for contempt. Parties have agreed that motion for contempt will be deferred pending Petitioner’s locating and removing all referenced items to the minor child on the internet. Matter to be reset if disagreement between the parties about removal of items referring to minor child and her likeness from internet. Court interview minor child – no record per agreement of the parties. Court suspends parenting time of Respondent due to Respondent’s continued use of her website and the internet to publish photographs of minor child and statements reference minor child. Court will entertain motion to reinstate parenting time once Respondent deletes all photographs and likenesses of minor child, any reference to minor child on her website and the internet, agree not to discuss Court proceedings with minor child and not to discuss divorce with minor child. Review set for December 16, 2009, at 10:00 a.m. T. Duncan to do JE. DBD
11/13/2009	-	SET – Hearing on 12/16/09 at 10:00AM. in division 13. (review for parenting time)
11/13/2009	-	Notice of hearing for 12/16/09 Hearing issued .
11/13/2009	-	#89 Amended Motion filed and entered by ROBERT E DUNCAN II for CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI, TO MODIFY VISITATION AND TO PROVIDE FOR ORTHODONTIC CARE AND MODIFICATION OF SUPPORT
11/13/2009	-	MINI DOMESTIC RELATIONS AFFIDAVIT OF HAL RICHARDSON
11/13/2009	-	CHILD SUPPORT WORKSHEET SUBMITTED BY FATHER
12/16/2009	-	Hearing continued at request of Respondent. Hearing reset January 8, 2010, at 1:30 p.m. DBD
12/16/2009	-	SET – Hearing on 01/08/10 at 01:30PM. in division 13. (review for parenting time)
12/16/2009	-	Notice of hearing for 01/08/10 Hearing issued .
12/16/2009	-	ORDER FILED – DBD.
12/21/2009	-	Hearing for 1/8/10 rescheduled due to conflict in Court’s schedule to 1/22/10 at 1:30 p.m.
12/21/2009	-	SET – Hearing on 01/22/10 at 01:30PM. in division 13. (review for parenting time)
12/21/2009	-	Notice of hearing for 01/22/10 Hearing issued .
12/22/2009	-	Hearing for 1/22/10 reset due to conflict in attorney’s schedules.
12/22/2009	-	SET – Hearing on 01/28/10 at 01:30PM. in division 13. (review for parenting time)
12/22/2009	-	Notice of hearing for 01/28/10 Hearing issued .
01/29/2010	-	MISC. Petitioner in person and by Jason Hoffman. Respondent in person and by Robert E. Duncan, II. G.A.L., Jill Dykes, present. Court Reporter: Digital Div. 13. Motion #88 to find Respondent in Contempt and Motion #87 by Respondent to Modify Visitation before Court. Evidence presented – Court finds Petitioner has failed to prove an intentional violation of Court’s prior orders by Respondent and denies motion to find Respondent in contempt. Court finds minor child has serious concerns about parenting time with mother but they do not rise to the level that would seriously endanger child’s physical, mental, moral or emotional health per K.S.A. 60-1616(a). Further, reasons for ordering supervised parenting time in 2004 were not presented in the evidence, minor child is 15 now and it is in best interest of child that both parents have relationship with child. Court orders unsupervised parenting time from 1:00 p.m. to 3:00 p.m. every Sunday, starting January 31, 2010 – exchanges at LEC, parenting time to be exercised in public within boundary of Shawnee County, Kansas. Neither parent to discuss divorce, proceedings or other parent with child. Respondent allowed to call daughter every Tuesday and Thursday between 8:00 p.m and 9:00 p.m. for 1/2 hour. Respondent to pay her remaining balance at Odyssey. Court will review case on March 2, 2010 at 8:30 a.m. to determine if parenting time should be expanded. Duncan to do JE. DBD
01/29/2010	-	SET – Hearing on 03/02/10 at 08:30AM. in division 13. (Review of parenting time)
01/29/2010	-	Notice of hearing for 03/02/10 Hearing issued .
02/12/2010	-	ORDER ESTABLISHING PARENTING TIME FILED – DBD.
02/26/2010	-	#90 Motion filed and entered by ROBERT E DUNCAN II for CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI, FOR CONTINUANCE
02/26/2010	-	Filed by Fax
03/01/2010	-	Agreed Order of Continuance signed by Court. Hearing for 3/2/10 removed.
03/02/2010	-	SET – Hearing on 05/24/10 at 11:00AM. in division 13. (review hearing)
03/02/2010	-	Notice of hearing for 05/24/10 Hearing issued .
03/04/2010	-	HEARING DATE OF 5/24/10 WAS A CONFLICT FOR MR. DUNCAN – MATTER RESCHEDULED UPON AGREEMENT OF ALL PARTIES TO MAY 26, 2010 AT 1:30 P.M.
03/04/2010	-	SET – Hearing on 05/26/10 at 01:30PM. in division 13. (review hearing)
03/04/2010	-	Notice of hearing for 05/26/10 Hearing issued .
03/10/2010	-	REQUEST FOR TRANSCRIPT FILED BY: CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI
03/16/2010	-	LETTER FROM DOROTHY SEEL,COURT REPORTER TO CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI DATED 03/12/10

05/17/2010-#91 Motion filed and entered by ROBERT E DUNCAN II for CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI, FOR CONTINUANCE. Filed by fax

05/25/2010-SET - Hearing on 08/20/10 at 09:00AM. in division 13. (review hearing)

05/26/2010-AGREED ORDER OF CONTINUANCE FILED - DBD.

05/28/2010-Notice of Hearing filed. To be heard 08/20/10 at 09:00A.M. Filed by fax

07/06/2010-AFFIDAVIT OF ACCUSATION IN CONTEMPT FILED.

08/18/2010-#92 Motion filed and entered by M JILL DYKES for CONTINUANCE

08/18/2010-RESPONSE TO RESPONDENT'S RESPONSE TO MOTION FOR CONTINUANCE FILED.

08/18/2010-RESPONSE TO MOTION FOR CONTINUANCE FILED.

08/18/2010-#93 Motion filed and entered by DONALD R HOFFMAN for HAL RICHARDSON, TO JOIN GAL'S MOTION FOR CONTINUANCE

08/18/2010-AMENDED CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE MOTION TO JOIN GAL'S MOTION FOR CONTINUANCE FILED

08/19/2010-Praecipe for Subpoena/Subpoena Duces Tecum filed by JASON P HOFFMAN.

08/19/2010-Subpoena Duces Tecum issued personal service returnable 08/20/10 09:00A.M. as to DR DAVID RODEHFFER issued to special process server.

08/19/2010-Subpoena Duces Tecum returned, residence service, left with Agent/Officer - as to DR DAVID RODEHFFER 08/19/10

08/19/2010-ORDER DENYING CONTINUANCE FILED - DBD.

08/20/2010-MISC. Petitioner in person and by Donald Hoffman. Respondent in person and by Robert E. Duncan, II. G.A.L., Jill Dykes, present. Court Reporter: Digital Div. 13. Matter proceeds on review of Court's order of January 28, 2010, establishing unsupervised parenting time for Respondent. Dr. Rodeheffer offers testimony - matter continued to a date to be agreed upon for additional testimony. Court finds that Dr. Rodeheffer's report of May 18, 2010, has been published on the website of Respondent. Court suspends Respondent's parenting time pending final hearing in this matter. Respondent's counsel is to review Respondent's cell phone to determine if there are images of report on Respondent's cell phone - Respondent's phone time with minor child to continue but to Petitioner's home phone. Due to publication of report on the Internet, which deals with minor child, Court finds that there is a privacy interest of the minor child that is central to these proceedings and outweighs the public interest and orders that the files, records, and transcripts of the case be sealed until further order of the Court. J. Dykes to do order. DBD

08/20/2010-SET - Hearing on 10/19/10 at 09:00AM. in division 13.

08/20/2010-Notice of hearing for 10/19/10 Hearing issued .

08/26/2010-PETITION FOR ALLOWANCE AND ASSESSMENT OF COURT-APPOINTED ATTORNEY/GUARDIAN AD LITEM FEES & ORDER ALLOWING AND ASSESSING FEE FILED - DBD. (Sent Certified copy to Ct Admin Office)

09/13/2010-Case transferred from Div. 13 to Div. 03, New Judicial Assignment. JMS

09/13/2010-ORDER FILED - DBD.

10/19/2010-MISC. Petitioner in person and by Donald Hoffman. Respondent in person and by Robert E. Duncan, II. G.A.L., Jill Dykes, present. Court Reporter: Sarah Davison. Parties continue presentation of evidence. Matter continued to 10/20/10 for Court to interview minor child. DBD

10/20/2010-MISC. Petitioner in person and by Donald Hoffman and Jason Hoffman. Respondent in person and by Robert E. Duncan, II. G.A.L., Jill Dykes, present. Court Reporter: Sarah Davison. Court finds inappropriate under K.S.A. 60-1616(a) to allow minor child control over when parenting time with mother should occur. Based on Respondent's violation of Court orders by posting material on the internet which references her daughter, continuing to bring up court case and proceedings with minor daughter, and volatile and unpredictable behavior with minor daughter, Court orders supervised parenting time for Respondent of every other Sunday from 1:00 p.m. to 3:00 p.m. Petitioner, Respondent and G.A.L. to agree on individual who will supervise parenting time or submit names to Court. Minor child has cell phone and can initiate phone calls to Respondent. Respondent not to initiate phone calls, text or e-mails to minor daughter. Respondent prohibited from placing any likeness of minor daughter, materials, or documents referring to minor daughter on internet or allow others to link to her internet site, face page, twitter site which would allow anyone to go to a linked site with this information. Respondent not to be provided any copies of medical or therapy records of minor daughter. T. Duncan to do JE. DBD

03/09/2011-NOTICE OF ADDRESS CHANGE OF RESPONDENT FILED.

03/30/2011-10 DAY NOTICE FILED.

03/30/2011-#94 MOTION FILED BY ROBERT E DUNCAN II TO WITHDRAW AS COUNSEL OF RECORD FOR RESPONDENT

04/14/2011-ORDER FILED - DBD.

05/12/2011-Order for withdrawal of attorney, ROBERT E DUNCAN II filed – DBD

06/09/2011-BUSINESS RECORDS OF SHAWNEE COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE DESTROYED. RECEIVED RECORDS 06/01/04

We don’t need Guardian Ad Litems or Mental Health – so called ‘experts’ in the family courts. BAD FOR CHILDREN BAD FOR MOTHERS

2011-06-24T08:26:00.001-04:00

We don’t need GALs, ACs, or LGs in the family courts. Same with forensic evaluations. Nancy Erkison’s article (dated 2007)

LawGuardians2007[1]

GAL Power

2011-06-23T08:22:00.001-04:00

Also See: The Guardian Ad Litem Scandals - Legislative Reforms Needed http://bit.ly/lSM0x3

Jill Dykes and Rene Netherton: your racket and easy pay of blood money and your GAL profession is about to bottom out, along with any semblance of any redemption you may have—perhaps being a human would be a start—but we know that you are not. Karma is a bitch.

GAL Power

Marcus Griffith

"As a result, she has viewed all allegations of sexual abuse by her children ... as efforts to discredit her and to gain the advantage in a custody battle, rather than wake-up calls to a victim of child sexual abuse who remade herself into sexual abuse zombie ... "

GAL Power

Marcus Griffith

Divorced parents with minor children often fight over custody and visitation rights, producing courtroom decisions that are complex and often heartbreaking for at least one parent. This story takes a rare public look into that system for two reasons:

First, it involves the kind of complicated, personal and family situations that make these cases so difficult to adjudicate. Secondly, there is the additional drama of conflict combined with allegations of questionable performances among the justice system officials themselves.

Clark County Court Commissioner Carin Schienberg recently removed two children from their mother’s home, even though no petition for such action was before the court. Schienberg based her temporary decision on an allegedly flawed report prepared by a court-appointed guardian ad litem (GAL).

When the mother’s attorney criticized the GAL report and refused to apologize for her comments, the commissioner held the attorney in contempt and fined her $500.

The commissioner’s ruling is under appeal, with a hearing pending. Meanwhile, the two minor children have been moved to the custody of their father. He has issued multiple threats of legal action against the writer and any publication who would publish a story about this case.

In Washington State, court commissioners are appointed by superior court judges. They are not elected by the public, but they have many of the same responsibilities and authorities as a superior court judge.

A family law guardian ad litem is appointed by the court to represent the best interests of a child, often during divorce or custody proceedings. In addition to family law matters, a GAL can be appointed to assist anyone a court deems legally incapacitated. Clark County commissioners and judges appointed GALs 396 times in 2010, according to Superior Court Administrator Jeffrey Amram.

GAL reports are confidential. However, the author obtained a copy of the GAL report from an undisclosed source after concerns were raised about contents of the report and the commissioner’s ruling.

Case didn’t seek custody

In August 2008, the mother received “primary residential placement” of the two minor children as part of a court-approved parenting plan. After more than two years of continuing conflict between the parents, the father filed an October 2010 contempt motion against the mother for violation of visitation rights.

The commissioner, in early December, held the mother in contempt for certain violations. At the same time, she approved a motion to require that transfer of the children for visitation times take place at the Vancouver police station due to conflict between the parties.

In November, the mother filed a petition to modify the parenting plan, asking for restricted visitation time with the father until he received counseling for anger management. The father, responding in December, said there was insufficient proof for a major modification of that plan.

That is the issue before the court that led to the appointment of Vancouver attorney Meredith McKell Graff as Guardian ad Litem to investigate the matter.

According to the mother’s attorney, Vancouver attorney April Brinkman, the GAL report was supposed to be finished by the first of February 2011. However, it was not submitted to the court until May 12, and it came with a blockbuster recommendation that the children be removed from the mother’s home and the father be given primary residential placement.

A source close to the case, who asked not to be identified, said there were significant concerns about the integrity of that 26-page report, which were ignored by Commissioner Schienberg. The source called the report a product of “shoddy investigation” and involved “lies told in court” by Graff.

Background shows need for a GAL

It has been almost a decade since the Clark County parents in this case were divorced. Subsequent battles over custody of their children have included numerous allegations between the parties of child abuse, sexual abuse, stalking and harassment.

The 2008 parenting plan noted the “abusive use of conflict by both parents” as a potential risk to the “psychological development” of both children. Information from various sources and documents reveals disturbing allegations surrounding both parents that make it difficult to sort fact from fiction.

One of the more disturbing allegations against the mother is referred to as the “wiener game.” It was reported to Child Protective Services at an unspecified time, according to the confidential GAL report. While bathing with her children, the report says, the mother “taught each boy how to stimulate himself to erection… then balance an action figure toy on their erect penis. The longer they can hold the toy on their penis is the winner (sic).”

The father allegedly has forced his children to write false accusations against their month, including allegations outlines in a recent police report. In that June 1 report, Battle Ground Officer Joshua Phelps wrote:

“I asked [redacted] about his mom making him lie about things. [Redacted] told me that she did not do that, but their father told them to write that down.”

It doesn’t appear, at this time, that police or Child Protective Services have substantiated allegations against either parent, but due to the long record of conflict it’s no surprise that the court saw need for an independent and objective view of a GAL.

GAL investigation takes a turn

The court order appointing Meredith McKell Graff as GAL instructed her to “investigate and report the factual information to the court concerning parenting arrangements” of the two children. Graff’s final report was unequivocal in its recommendation.

“The children in this matter… are at extreme risk of harm if they remain any longer in the mother’s home,” the report states. “They should be removed immediately.”

Subsequent concerns about the GAL report are voiced prominently by the mother’s attorney in the motion for reversal of Commissioner Schienberg’s temporary order.

High on the list of concerns about the May 12 report is a statement by Graff that she interviewed the references for both parents. That conflicts with her statement of May 24 in which she declared, “I did not interview (the mother’s reference); my legal assistant performed this task.”

Neither statement revealed the actual fact that Graff’s assistant, Heidi Atwood, actually interviewed all four references listed in the report.

“As the guardian ad litem’s legal assistant,” wrote Atwood in her May 24 declaration to the court, “in order to save time… I was given the assignment of calling all the guardian ad litem references and asking them the questions requested by the guardian ad litem ... ”

Atwood is not listed on the court-approved guardian ad litem registry, and there’s no record that she has completed any of the required training to work as guardian ad litem. She is a 40-year-old college student at Washington State University whose only professional license in Washington is as a Notary Public, according to Graff’s law office and state documents.

A lie in court?

Court transcripts of the June 2 hearing include Graff’s statement that she couldn’t obtain a release from the mother to get medical records. “Because (the mother) did not sign a HIPAA release with her doctor … I did not get medical records from the mother,” said Graff.

However, Brinkman has since filed with the court a copy of just such a release, signed by the mother on March 29 and faxed to Graff’s office, according to Brinkman.

Further, Graff didn’t need that release to get the information. The court order appointing her includes a signed “release of information” provision giving her access to all pertinent records, specifically including health care records, for both parents.

The GAL report says that Graff has “minimal concerns with the father,” despite the fact that she quoted a 2007 psychological evaluation saying that the father has “issues with chronic and intense anger;” that he is “not able to express negative feeling appropriately;” that he is “over-controlled with brief, impulsive episodes of acting out;” and that he is “sensitive to rejection and has a subtle paranoia that is expressed as jealously or possessiveness. He can be hostile when criticized and has little self-awareness.”

The doctor who conducted that psychological evaluation of the father also evaluated his current wife, saying she is “aggressive and striving,” and “defines her view as the correct one and assumes that to disagree with her is simply a demonstration of one’s lack of understanding.”

Graff’s report did not disagree with that impression, but said the children need a controlling adult in their lives. “Even though the father’s wife may appear to some that she is ‘controlling,’ she is actually what the boys need right now,” Graff wrote.

The report recommended that both parents enter counseling, but held “no reservations” about having the children moved to primary residency with their father.

Many issues of credibility

Graff used Child Protective Services reports to help form her recommendation that the children face eminent harm in the mother’s care. However, none of the allegations against the mother have been substantiated by Child Protective Services, police or the county prosecutor’s office, according to available court documents.

Graff considered various allegations of both parents to be less than credible.

“The parents — both of them — have engaged in CPS and the police far too often, and too many times with false or misleading information, in order to discredit the other parent,” Graff stated.

It’s not clear, then, why allegations from one side would become grounds for such a significant recommendation. There is also a matter of various subjective and inflammatory words and phrases used in the report.

The report at one point says that the mother “remade herself into a sexual abuse zombie,” and later says a photo of the mother and her new husband “shows them tonguing like reptiles.” Nothing clarified the use of those phrases as part of an evaluation of parenting skills.

The GAL report also indicates that Graff did not interview the children’s doctors, teachers, psychologists or neighbors.

Lack of balance in interviews

Graff — or rather, her assistant, Atwood — interviewed three references for the father but only one for the mother, an imbalance that casts doubt on fairness of the investigation. And despite Graff being assigned the investigation in December, Atwood didn’t start requesting interviews with the mother’s references until May 10, according to numerous court documents and the declaration of a veteran Oregon police officer.

Officer Jason Maddy stated, “The law office of McKell Graff left a voicemail for me Tuesday, May 10, 2011, sometime during the afternoon. Records indicate that the voicemail was the first and only time that Atwood called Maddy. He planned to call Atwood on May 13, but Graff completed her report on May 11.

Maddy, an experienced investigator, was bothered by the one-day callback window. “I would never even think of just calling someone and leaving a message and writing the report the next day without hearing from them,” Maddy stated. He further stated that he “would have been able to provide very important information about how I have seen (the mother) interact with her children.”

Another reference provided by the mother said she didn’t receive the request for an interview until May 11. By the time she called Graff’s law office the report already was filed, and Atwood wouldn’t document what she said would have been favorable statements about the mother.

Even more disturbing, although Graff may have stopped taking statements in support of the mother on May 11, she continued taking statements against the mother even after the report was filed with the court. In her May 24 declaration, Graff references new allegations against the mother that surfaced after the confidential report was filed on May 12.

“I have been now told,” wrote Graph in that declaration, “that the children have been punished for telling me things that the mother did not want me to know or the children to tell me.”

Second-hand allegations

Graff appears to have disregarded her direct observations of the mother’s house in favor of statements from unidentified sources.

“The mother’s home is chaotic and dirty,” Graff stated in her report. However, she wrote that the house was staged to look clean during her lone visit there.

“The mother made a point of having me go ‘say goodnight’ to each boy before beginning the interview,” Graff wrote. “I am concerned this was an effort to get me to walk down the hall to show me that the house was ‘neat,’ rather than how it had been prior to its staging for my visit.”

The report cited an unnamed source who reported to Graff that the mother put a large amount of “stuff” in storage so Graff would not see the usual state of the house.

In contrast, Graff was very impressed with the father’s home, where she made multiple visits. She wrote: “Going in, one feels a sense of peace and calm.” Although records indicate that there was only one investigative interview at the father’s house, Graff wrote, “I have been to the (father’s) home on more than occasion.”

The father’s house is in an upscale neighborhood, and court documents indicate that the father makes substantially more money than the mother. Graff said, however, that those factors were not taken into consideration in her recommendation.

“To be clear,” she wrote, “my recommendation for (the father) being named the primary residential parent is not based on socio-economic factors. I have been appointed in other cases where the recommended placement was for the poorer home of the two parents.”

She continued, in one of the report’s more unusual narratives: “One can be clean, neat, organized, and poor, with clean, ragged clothes and one can have money and worldly possessions and be dirty, chaotic, and provide no supervision for children, along with allowing them to be sexually abused within the grand, expensive home.”

GAL invoices for thousands more

Graff is seeking payment of almost $2,500 more than was first authorized by the court, which wrote in its appointing order: “The guardian ad litem fee is $75 per hour up to $750, the maximum the guardian ad litem may charge without additional court review and approval.”

That full $750 was paid months ago through combined payments from the parents. But according to Graff, she has racked up 41.6 hours to date for a total bill of $3,120. She stated in a court document that it would be “appropriate for the court to order the parties to share an additional $2,370.”

The GAL invoice does not explain how many hours her assistant worked, of whether those hours are included in the billing.

Commissioner’s fully endorses report

The June 2 hearing, held in open court, included specific reference to contents of the confidential GAL report. And Commissioner Schienberg seemed very pleased with the quality of the report.

“First of all,” Schienberg said in the hearing, I want to thank Ms. Graff for her work. I think you did an excellent job; it was very thorough … I think she did an excellent report.”

The commission, however, went beyond stating her positive impression of the report. When April Brinkman questioned the lack of supporting documents in the report, Schienberg was quick to demand that Brinkman apologize to the GAL.

“There’s no evidence to support anything that the GAL has said,” Brinkman stated in court. The transcript record of that statement provides no information on tone, volume, body language or any other factor except the words themselves.

“Excuse me, you’re going to apologize right now to this Court and to Ms. Graff,” said Schienberg, “or I will hold you in contempt. You apologize, now.”

Brinkman declined to apologize, was held in contempt of court and was fined $500.

Schienberg said in the hearing that her decision to relocate the children was based on the GAL report, statements made during the hearing and unspecified “documents in Volumes 4 and 5.”

According to the court transcript, Brinkman did not receive those documents, and they were not listed in Graff’s report.

At one point, Brinkman asked Schienberg if “the guardian ad litem is supposed to attach any document she used to the report the Court considers?” Schienberg responded:

“Okay. I took the report that Ms. Graff has provided me and her comments, she is an officer of the court. I trust that when speaks to the court, she is not lying to the court. She has an excellent reputation in this court. She is a person who has done a number of guardian ad litem reports, always well done, always thoroughly researched, always coming to an unbiased, no prejudicial conclusion. I value her work.”

Perhaps reflecting the volatile nature of cases before her court, Commissioner Schienberg has attracted a Facebook page entitled “Fire Washington Court Commissioner Carin Schienberg.” The page has 30 members and includes comments from people who have had family law matters before her court.

Schienberg, reached via e-mail with a request for comment on this story, said she could not comment on an ongoing matter.

Legislator interested in case

Washington State Rep. Ann Rivers of the 18th District and a member of the House Judiciary Committee, was contacted by the mother with concerns about this case. Rivers confirmed in a phone interview that she spoke with the mother and is “concerned” by the issues raised.

“Anytime we have children put into a destabilized system, families lose out,” said Rivers, adding that she is in the “infancy stage of research” and is seeking more information from state legal staff.

Rivers said she believes that parents should place their responsibility to their children above any personal disagreement with each other. As for certain unusual language in the GAL report, Rivers said it wasn’t the kind of thing she would expect to see in a formal report.

Meanwhile, the author and The Vancouver Voice received emailed threats — from the father’s email account — of legal action if the investigation into this case continues. A June 16 email also suggests that Graff is providing legal assistance to the father and his current wife, stating:

“The guardian ad litem is also an attorney and these minors (sic) attorney, and she informed us today that if you print or allow Mr. Griffith to print a story about these minors, you and Mr. Griffith will be served with lawsuits, liable to start.”

Attorney Meredith Graff did not respond to several requests for comment. For updates on the case, visit the blog, VanVoice Blotter, at www.vanvoice.com.

Rene M. Netherton- Court Appointed Child Abuser and Child Trafficker

2011-06-22T10:18:00.001-04:00

http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=500918795

Now this is original--- of course a ‘skank’ bottom dweller Topeka Kansas Attorney would define themselves on facebook—pretty much as she is—only this ‘bitch’ (the doggie pic) has more grit than the other ‘bitch’ Rene Netherton.

The only person she scares is her dead mother Marge., perhaps her dead daddy too.

She literally sold out her own family to be a “nobody”. How honorable.

http://www.webpagescreenshot.info/img/48069-622201151037PM

Screenshot Details:Url: http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=500918795

Created: 6/22/2011 5:10:37 PM

A Cancer Spreading in the Custody Court System Courts Punish Battered Mothers and give Children To Abusers

2011-06-20T23:28:00.001-04:00

Rene M Netherton GAL Court Appointed Child Abuser

View the Pilot for MURPHY’S JUSTICE Television Starring Susan Murphy Milano!

This is HOT…This is NOW…It’s here and it’s HAPPENING!

PLEASE GO TO YOUTUBE “LIKE” AND LEAVE COMMENTS!

Related articles

CINC for minor child Pediatrician Medical Records indicate sexual abuse from father Hal Richardson

Domestic Violence Continued: Contested Child Custody Through Protracted Litigation

Topeka, KS: Safe Visit Looses United Way Funding, A Child trafficking, Batterer Friendly, Custody Switch Program. Fatherhood Initiatives Give Batterers Custody

It’s about time!!!! YEAH!!!! one less, so many more to go….

‘Monsters in the Closet’ Devastating View of Domestic Violence From a Child’s Perspective

U. S. Department of Justice v. Custody Court System

One More Battleground: Domestic Violence, Child Custody, and the Batterers’ Relentless Pursuit of their Victims Through the Courts

Topeka Kansas: Failure to Protect Violates Statutes

Shawnee County DA’s Office and City of Topeka Working to Resolve Misdemeanor Case Filings

The Susan Murphy Milano Show- "Scared To Leave Afraid To Stay" 2:00 PM Eastern Time Live

Go to www.herewomentalk.com

and listen in live!

Thursday, September 22, 2pm ET

Imagine Publicity: “Wounded Warrior” Claudine Dombrowski and Activist Barry Goldstein Join The Susan Murphy Milano Show, Time’s Up

MARKETING.PROMOTIONS.PUBLICITY

“Wounded Warrior” Claudine Dombrowski and Activist Barry Goldstein Join The Susan Murphy Milano Show, Time’s Up

The Susan Murphy Milano Show, “Time’s Up!”

Thursday, September 22, 2pm ET

Listen LIVE at: Here Women Talk

A Hard Hit to DV Victims by The Criminal Justice System in Kansas

Related Topics

Topeka, Kansas - Domestic Abuse Survivor Trembling Over DA's Decision to Pass Down Misdemeanors DV is NOT A CRIME in TOPEKA, KANSAS

Topeka Domestic Abuse Survivor Claudine Dombrowski Trembling Over DA's Decision to Pass Down Misdemeanors

Eleven years ago today 7-31-2000, Rikki Dombrowski was taken from her mother Claudine Dombrowski and given to convicted batterer HAL RICHARDSON

HAL RICHARDSON - COURT CRIMINAL RECORDS OF; VIOLENCE, BATTERY ON LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER, BATTERY AGAINST CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI, DRUGS, ALCOHOL, OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE, BAR FIGHTS ETC…

1995 DV 95CR836 Mary Kelly PSI Not Good Candidate for RECOMMEND PRISON for Criminal conviction of CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI

1995 ABP Records Hal Richardson CR Conviction of Domestic Violence to Claudine Dombrowski (HE WAS KICKED OUT!)

1990 SARP Alcohol Drug TX Hal Richardson From Conviction on Battery of Law Enforcement Officer

Rene Netherton’s Threats exposed at the Battered Mothers Custody Conference in Albany NY , 2011

I am the Mother of Rikki Dombrowski. Sham in Shawnee County (Topeka, Kansas)

Color of Law Abuses

When Abusers FORCE their Victims to Marry them Like HAL RICHARDSON forced Claudine Dombrowski.

What Litigation Abuse Looks Like! It Boggles The Mind That Each Line Represents a Trip to Court.

We don’t need Guardian Ad Litems or Mental Health – so called ‘experts’ in the family courts. BAD FOR CHILDREN BAD FOR MOTHERS

GAL Power

Also See: The Guardian Ad Litem Scandals - Legislative Reforms Needed http://bit.ly/lSM0x3

Marcus Griffith

Marcus Griffith

Rene M. Netherton- Court Appointed Child Abuser and Child Trafficker

A Cancer Spreading in the Custody Court System Courts Punish Battered Mothers and give Children To Abusers

Read more Here: A Cancer Spreading in the Custody Court System