WHITE COLLAR CRIMES ABUSE OF PROCESS PROFESSIONAL MISCONDUCT LAWYER MISCONDUCT JUDICIAL MISCONDUCT : January 2015

----Forwarded message----
From: nine09digits@yahoo.com
To: info@iteam.com, teamhope@ncmec.org
Sent: Sun, Dec 14, 2014 2:40 AM EST
Subject: FW: 39.0014,39.0141 MISSING CHILDRENS REPORT REQUIRED WHICH IN ITS ABSENCE AT THE COMMENCEMENT OF PROCEEDINGS 8 FRAUD, TORT ACTIONS OF FRAUD INCLUSIVE OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE AND VAWA BY THE FATHERS TO CASE WHO KNEW THE ALLEGATIONS WERE FALSE, LACK OF DEMONSTRATIVE EVIDENCE REGARDING MALTREATMENT AT A THRESHOLD OF FINDINGS, 39.0137 FEDERAL LAW RULEMAKING, SANCTIONS REGARDING CONFLICTS OF INTEREST ATTORNEY DECEIT IN REPRESENTATION OF BOTH SIDES PRIOR TO WHICH THE SAME ATTORNEY HAD KNOWLEDGE OF RELEVANT CASE HISTORIES INCLUSIVE OF ABUSE AND CRIMINAL NONSUPPORT, ,39.0196 FW: WHITE COLLAR CRIME COMPLAINT STARTING WITH THE CPI RISS ACCESS TAX REFUND INTERFERENCE Fw: enforcement of Section 1001 of Title 18 of the United States Code, a statute that criminalizes false statements made directly or indirectly to the Federal government.

----Forwarded message----
From: nine09digits@yahoo.com
To: flbranch@ncmec.org
Sent: Sun, Dec 14, 2014 2:36 AM EST
Subject: FW: 39.0014,39.0141 MISSING CHILDRENS REPORT REQUIRED WHICH IN ITS ABSENCE AT THE COMMENCEMENT OF PROCEEDINGS CONSTITUTES FRAUD, TORT ACTIONS OF FRAUD INCLUSIVE OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE AND VAWA BY THE FATHERS TO CASE WHO KNEW THE ALLEGATIONS WERE FALSE, LACK OF DEMONSTRATIVE EVIDENCE REGARDING MALTREATMENT AT A THRESHOLD OF FINDINGS, 39.0137 FEDERAL LAW RULEMAKING, SANCTIONS REGARDING CONFLICTS OF INTEREST ATTORNEY DECEIT IN REPRESENTATION OF BOTH SIDES PRIOR TO WHICH THE SAME ATTORNEY HAD KNOWLEDGE OF RELEVANT CASE HISTORIES INCLUSIVE OF ABUSE AND CRIMINAL NONSUPPORT, ,39.0196 FW: WHITE COLLAR CRIME COMPLAINT STARTING WITH THE CPI RISS ACCESS TAX REFUND INTERFERENCE Fw: enforcement of Section 1001 of Title 18 of the United States Code, a statute that criminalizes false statements made directly or indirectly to the Federal government.

----Forwarded message----
From: nine09digits@yahoo.com
To: humanrights@cchr.org, cristal.jones@hhs.gov, chicago@hrw.org, contact@uhrc.org, ghabtom@ohchr.org, sthodiyil@ohchr.org,hrwpress@hrw.org, dcf-osc@dcf.state.fl.us
Sent: Sun, Dec 14, 2014 1:47 AM EST
Subject: FW: 39.0014,39.0141 MISSING CHILDRENS REPORT REQUIRED WHICH IN ITS ABSENCE AT THE COMMENCEMENT OF PROCEEDINGS CONSTITUTES FRAUD, TORT ACTIONS OF FRAUD INCLUSIVE OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE AND VAWA BY THE FATHERS TO CASE WHO KNEW THE ALLEGATIONS WERE FALSE, LACK OF DEMONSTRATIVE EVIDENCE REGARDING MALTREATMENT AT A THRESHOLD OF FINDINGS, 39.0137 FEDERAL LAW RULEMAKING, SANCTIONS REGARDING CONFLICTS OF INTEREST ATTORNEY DECEIT IN REPRESENTATION OF BOTH SIDES PRIOR TO WHICH THE SAME ATTORNEY HAD KNOWLEDGE OF RELEVANT CASE HISTORIES INCLUSIVE OF ABUSE AND CRIMINAL NONSUPPORT, ,39.0196 FW: WHITE COLLAR CRIME COMPLAINT STARTING WITH THE CPI RISS ACCESS TAX REFUND INTERFERENCE Fw: enforcement of Section 1001 of Title 18 of the United States Code, a statute that criminalizes false statements made directly or indirectly to the Federal government.

----Forwarded message----
From: nine09digits@yahoo.com
To: tampa.division@ic.fbi.gov
Sent: Sun, Dec 14, 2014 1:43 AM EST
Subject: FW: 39.0014,39.0141 MISSING CHILDRENS REPORT REQUIRED WHICH IN ITS ABSENCE AT THE COMMENCEMENT OF PROCEEDINGS CONSTITUTES FRAUD, TORT ACTIONS OF FRAUD INCLUSIVE OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE AND VAWA BY THE FATHERS TO CASE WHO KNEW THE ALLEGATIONS WERE FALSE, LACK OF DEMONSTRATIVE EVIDENCE REGARDING MALTREATMENT AT A THRESHOLD OF FINDINGS, 39.0137 FEDERAL LAW RULEMAKING, SANCTIONS REGARDING CONFLICTS OF INTEREST ATTORNEY DECEIT IN REPRESENTATION OF BOTH SIDES PRIOR TO WHICH THE SAME ATTORNEY HAD KNOWLEDGE OF RELEVANT CASE HISTORIES INCLUSIVE OF ABUSE AND CRIMINAL NONSUPPORT, ,39.0196 FW: WHITE COLLAR CRIME COMPLAINT STARTING WITH THE CPI RISS ACCESS TAX REFUND INTERFERENCE Fw: enforcement of Section 1001 of Title 18 of the United States Code, a statute that criminalizes false statements made directly or indirectly to the Federal government.

----Forwarded message----
From: nine09digits@yahoo.com
To: hhstips@oig.hhs.gov, htips@os.dhhs.gov, newstips@wfts.com, tips@abovethelaw.com, bonnie.hazleton@dep.state.fl.us,john.r.peterson@dep.state.fl.us, lisa.kelley@dep.state.fl.us, ombudsman@dos.state.fl.us, ombudsman@da.sccgov.org, florida@adl.org,ag.mccollum@myfloridalegal.com, adams@myfloridahouse.gov, gardiner@myfloridahouse.gov, nelson@myfloridahouse.gov,fcpti@myfloridalegal.com, edna.smith@myfloridalegal.com, scottopengov@eog.myflorida.com, fcf@floridaschildrenfirst.org,dbrown@flabar.org, spiland@flabar.org, dmaffei@flabar.org, fwalker@flabar.org, esloyer@flabar.org, kmarvin@flabar.org,rscott@flabar.org, kkirksey@flabar.org, fchrinfo@dms.state.fl.us, chrinfo@fchr.myflorida.com, publicinformation@flcourts.org,russfernandes@fdle.state.fl.us, sexpred@fdle.state.fl.us, contact@floridadjqc.com, now@now.org, florida_now_president@yahoo.com,contact@nw3c.org, ccq_contact@nationalchildsupport.com, contact@gao.gov, contactoge@oge.gov,
contactoge@oge.gov, contact@floridadjqc.com, contact_ed@takeroot.org
Sent: Sun, Dec 14, 2014 1:41 AM EST
Subject: FW: 39.0014,39.0141 MISSING CHILDRENS REPORT REQUIRED WHICH IN ITS ABSENCE AT THE COMMENCEMENT OF PROCEEDINGS CONSTITUTES FRAUD, TORT ACTIONS OF FRAUD INCLUSIVE OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE AND VAWA BY THE FATHERS TO CASE WHO KNEW THE ALLEGATIONS WERE FALSE, LACK OF DEMONSTRATIVE EVIDENCE REGARDING MALTREATMENT AT A THRESHOLD OF FINDINGS, 39.0137 FEDERAL LAW RULEMAKING, SANCTIONS REGARDING CONFLICTS OF INTEREST ATTORNEY DECEIT IN REPRESENTATION OF BOTH SIDES PRIOR TO WHICH THE SAME ATTORNEY HAD KNOWLEDGE OF RELEVANT CASE HISTORIES INCLUSIVE OF ABUSE AND CRIMINAL NONSUPPORT, ,39.0196 FW: WHITE COLLAR CRIME COMPLAINT STARTING WITH THE CPI RISS ACCESS TAX REFUND INTERFERENCE Fw: enforcement of Section 1001 of Title 18 of the United States Code, a statute that criminalizes false statements made directly or indirectly to the Federal government.

----Forwarded message----
From: nine09digits@yahoo.com
To: simpson@civilrights.org, community.newark@usdoj.gov, detcoalition@att.net, media@aclu.org, cleslie@midwesthumanrights.org,info@nacole.org, justcause@lawcollective.org, jfloyd@johntfloyd.com, isha@cs.com, freedman@voicenet.com, nacole@nacole.org,media@judicialwatch.org, citizensnvw@bellsouth.net, info@aele.org, policeoversight@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sun, Dec 14, 2014 1:32 AM EST
Subject: FW: 39.0014,39.0141 MISSING CHILDRENS REPORT REQUIRED WHICH IN ITS ABSENCE AT THE COMMENCEMENT OF PROCEEDINGS CONSTITUTES FRAUD, TORT ACTIONS OF FRAUD INCLUSIVE OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE AND VAWA BY THE FATHERS TO CASE WHO KNEW THE ALLEGATIONS WERE FALSE, LACK OF DEMONSTRATIVE EVIDENCE REGARDING MALTREATMENT AT A THRESHOLD OF FINDINGS, 39.0137 FEDERAL LAW RULEMAKING, SANCTIONS REGARDING CONFLICTS OF INTEREST ATTORNEY DECEIT IN REPRESENTATION OF BOTH SIDES PRIOR TO WHICH THE SAME ATTORNEY HAD KNOWLEDGE OF RELEVANT CASE HISTORIES INCLUSIVE OF ABUSE AND CRIMINAL NONSUPPORT, ,39.0196 FW: WHITE COLLAR CRIME COMPLAINT STARTING WITH THE CPI RISS ACCESS TAX REFUND INTERFERENCE Fw: enforcement of Section 1001 of Title 18 of the United States Code, a statute that criminalizes false statements made directly or indirectly to the Federal government.

----Forwarded message----
From: nine09digits@yahoo.com
To: phrusa@phrusa.org, info@veilofinnocence.org, info@nationalcenterdvtraumamh.org, psireland@familyplace.org,marsham@dvsolutions.org, acts_development@comcast.net, mmclauglin@nnedv.org, rtolman@umich.edu, jedleson@umn.edu,media@ndvh.org, crisis@866uswomen.org, domesticviolence@dcf.state.fl.us, publicpolicy@ncadv.org, mainoffice@ncadv.org,info@legalproject.org, info@ontherise.org, hubbardhouse@hubbardhouse.org, info@courtclasses.com, arcarot@nsu.law.nova.edu,bwittel@sheriffs.org, acs@pcadv.org, rturckes@fletc.treas.gov, admin@ncjfcj.unr.edu, fnatalie@wfstone.com, pace_jennifer@fcadv.org,icadv@violenceresource.org
Sent: Sun, Dec 14, 2014 1:29 AM EST
Subject: 39.0014,39.0141 MISSING CHILDRENS REPORT REQUIRED WHICH IN ITS ABSENCE AT THE COMMENCEMENT OF PROCEEDINGS CONSTITUTES FRAUD, TORT ACTIONS OF FRAUD INCLUSIVE OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE AND VAWA BY THE FATHERS TO CASE WHO KNEW THE ALLEGATIONS WERE FALSE, LACK OF DEMONSTRATIVE EVIDENCE REGARDING MALTREATMENT AT A THRESHOLD OF FINDINGS, 39.0137 FEDERAL LAW RULEMAKING, SANCTIONS REGARDING CONFLICTS OF INTEREST ATTORNEY DECEIT IN REPRESENTATION OF BOTH SIDES PRIOR TO WHICH THE SAME ATTORNEY HAD KNOWLEDGE OF RELEVANT CASE HISTORIES INCLUSIVE OF ABUSE AND CRIMINAL NONSUPPORT, ,39.0196 FW: WHITE COLLAR CRIME COMPLAINT STARTING WITH THE CPI RISS ACCESS TAX REFUND INTERFERENCE Fw: enforcement of Section 1001 of Title 18 of the United States Code, a statute that criminalizes false statements made directly or indirectly to the Federal government.

----Forwarded message----
From: nine09digits@yahoo.com
To: Karlene_Cole-Palmer@dcf.state.fl.us
Sent: Tue, Dec 9, 2014 2:41 PM EST
Subject: WHITE COLLAR CRIME COMPLAINT STARTING WITH THE CPI RISS ACCESS TAX REFUND INTERFERENCE Fw: enforcement of Section 1001 of Title 18 of the United States Code, a statute that criminalizes false statements made directly or indirectly to the Federal government.

Central RegionKarlene Cole-Palmer
CLS Regional Director
Children’s Legal Services
Department of Children and Families
400 West Robinson Street, Suite S1114
Orlando, Florida 32801
Office: (407) 245-0530
E-mail: Karlene_Cole-Palmer@dcf.state.fl.us

Karlene Cole-Palmer,it is believed that the CPI in this complaint accessed the SDU, state disbursement unit on February 3rd,2011 and February 4th 2011 to intercept child support payments, as indicated by a SDU representative upon inquiry regarding a recent child support order, judgement, issued by Division 42, Orange County, Florida, respondent and payor, Carlos Alberto Gonzalez. The CPI false allegations were intended to intercept payments, indicative as a white collar economic crime, fraud. The CPI made this intercept by deception on the court and fraud alleging that my children had been kidnapped as a dismissal was entered agaiinst Felicia Handley, the CPI in this complaint on January 28th, 2011 after without a court order or any documentation she not only harassed me in public, but violated the children's and my rights the evening of January 27th, 2011 arriving at a convience store with the Orlando Police Department. Felicia Handley's
accompanying agent jumped out a gray yelling "it's over", 'its over" as witnessed by Orlando Police Department. The incident occurred on the evening of Michyl Shaw's science night at Ferncreek Elementary, whereas the parents and the children were transported by Orange County District Schools to Ferncreek Elementary and then home again. Shortly after departing off the school bus and walking over to the covenience store nearby our residence, the police and a gray car that Handley and the accompanying agent were in, pulled up in front of the convience store and detained myself and my children stating that they had a right to take the children that evening until court the following morning, and that they had already contacted the fathers of the children prior to arrival which is where the children were to be taken in to temporary custody without an order from the court until the hearing the following morning on January 28th, 2011. At the hearing held
in the judicial chambers of Judge Anthony Johnson, DCF representatives, the CPI, Felicia Handley were informed that there would be a dismissal and the children were to attend school, and until further notice of an eviction from the residential address, no action would be heard.Felicia Hankley follows with a malicious, attrocious lie about missing children and kidnapping, that both Michyl Shaw and Isis Shaw had been missing since February 3, 2011, which was false, and verifiable by the children's primary doctor who had seen both children on the evening of February 3rd, 2011 while in the custody of the mother, myself. In addition, no staff members or persons of authority at the residential dwelling had ever given such information to Felicia Handley.
I am inquiring as to what action under Florida and Federal Statute has been taken against Felicia Handley or the Department in addition to further evidence of fraud on the court, intentional omission by DCF departmental attorneys constituting attorney deciet and misconduct, of child support recovery proceedings in division 42 of which the mother and the children were under representation druing which time there ware repeated "reserved actions", and actions in the case regarding termination of parental rights which were unauthorized, not consulted upon or actions that continued to delay recovery and collection from what is referred legal as CRIMINAL NONSUPPORT, under federal recovery. Chapter 39 details what is referred to as a "threshold of demonstrative illustration" by the noncustodical parent of financial support outside of any family support or mental support in the interests of the children (PROCEEDINGS RELATING TO
CHILDREN http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&URL=0000-0099/0039/0039.html)

Sec. 411. Data collection and reporting

Social Security Act Title IV

https://www.acf.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/programs/css/child_support_handbook_with_toc.pdf
The federal child support program wasestablished in 1975 under Title IV-D of the SocialSecurity Act.

cc: letter

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Sheila Shaw <sdynastysheila@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, Dec 27, 2013 at 10:20 AM
Subject: BARBARA FANCHER,TANGELRODRIGUEZ, Esquire,(Judicial Officer: Roche,(Judicial Officer: Evans, Robert M) Renee(Judicial Officer Winslow, George),
To: ombudsman <John.R.Peterson@dep.state.fl.us>, "Ombudsman@dos.state.fl.us" <Ombudsman@dos.state.fl.us>, ombudsman <Lisa.Kelley@dep.state.fl.us>, Ombudsman <Bonnie.Hazleton@dep.state.fl.us>, "pennsylvania health, Abuse<ncea@nasua.org>, ACE <acepresident@acecashexpress.com>,, ACE <acepresident@acecashexpress.com>, ACES, <aces@childsupport-aces.org>, ACESGROUP, <aceschildsupportenews-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com>, ACLU, <aclufl@aclufl.org><paffairs@oig.hhs.gov>, Environmental Justice, <environmental-justice@epa.gov>, Ethics <contactOGE@oge.gov>,, Ethics <ethics@indiana.edu>, family violence, <fvdinfo@ncjfcj.org>, Federal Victims" <victimsrights@ic.fbi.gov>, HHSTips@oig.hhs.gov

BARBARA FANCHER,TANGEL RODRIGUEZ, Esquire,Hershkowitz Russell S Attorney(Judicial Officer: Roche,(Judicial Officer: Evans, Robert M) Renee(Judicial Officer Winslow, George)
Complaint regarding the subsequent violations:FALSE STATEMENTS MISCONDUCT FALSE KIDNAPPING REPORTS TO LAW ENFORCEMENT AND TO THE JUVENILE COURTLEGAL PHILANTHROPY MISUSE OF OFFICEINSTITUTIONAL CHILD ABUSELEGAL ABUSELAWYER MISCONDUCT ETHNIC BIASNESSMOCKERYTRIAL ERRORINTENTIONAL OMISSIONS ATTORNEY MISCONDUCT/ASSISTING CRIMINAL NONSUPPORT & CHILD SUPPORT RECOVERY ACT VIOLATIONS, FEDERAL CHILD SUPPORT COLLECTION LAWS, SOCIAL SECURITY ACT 654,655,666,NEGLIGENCE,(ASSISTING JUDICIAL MISCONDUCT,BUSINESS TORT LAW VIOLATIONS
absent advance directives from practioners of which the child wasa patient> 9457320158 (RFA CASE NUMBER 1143172973)Div 42 Judicial Officer: Evans, Robert MUniform Case Number: 482005DR014270A001OX

https://www.facebook.com/pages/Duty-to-report-misconduct/136147606416830Duty to report misconductThe duty to report misconduct is oneof the ethical duties imposed on attorneys in the United States by the rules governingprofessionalresponsibility. With certain exceptions, an attorney who becomes aware that either a fellow attorney or a judge has committed an act in violation of the rules of e...

BARBARA FANCHER,TANGELRODRIGUEZ, Esquire,(Judicial Officer: Roche,(Judicial Officer: Evans, Robert M) Renee(Judicial Officer Winslow, George),

The Violence Against Women Act of 1994 (VAWA) and the 1997 Omnibus Consolidated Appropriations Actand MISUSE OF OFFICE UNDER STATE AND FEDERAL LAWYou cannot use information available to you because of your job, but not available to the public, for your personal benefit or for the benefit of others. § 112.313(8), Fla. Stat.Title VI allows persons to file administrative complaints with the federal departments and agencies that provide financial assistance alleging discrimination based on race, color, or national origin by recipients of federal funds.Under Title VI, EPA has a responsibility to ensure that its funds are not being used to subsidize discrimination based on race, color, or national origin. This prohibition against discrimination under Title VI has been a statutory mandate since 1964 and EPA has had Title VI regulations since 1973.EPA's Office of Civil Rights is responsible for the Agency's administration of Title VI, including
investigation of such ... A registered support order is confirmed and immediately enforceable unless the respondent files an objection in a record within a fixed period of time, almost invariably the 20 days suggested originally, Sections 603 and 607.Section 604. TITLE 42 SECTIONS 666 AND 654, 657 COLLECTION AND DISTRIBUTION CITATION FROM THE FEDERAL STATUTE OF THE US CODE§ 657. Distribution of collected supportThe following is an abstract from the Administration for Children and Families' website and the Administration for Child Support Enforcement, both of which publish all statutory guidelines for the collection of child support and payments thereof to the recipient.collection and distribution of child support payments Within this site it is defined as follows Frequently Asked Questions about Child Support Collection/Distribution For answers to questions about your own case, you need to check with your local or state child support office. State
CSE agency telephone numbers and addresses are at (English):http://ocse3.acf.dhhs.gov/int/ directories/ext/IVd_list.cfm(Spanish):http://ocse3.acf.dhhs.gov/int/ directories/ext/Espanol_IVd_ list.cfm State CSE agency web site links are on our web site at the following location:http://www.acf.dhhs.gov/ programs/cse/extinf.htm#exta

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Sheila Shaw <sdynastysheila@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 12:49 PM
Subject: WHITE COLLAR CRIME/ Fwd: ATTORNEY MISCONDUCT COMPLAINT- PEER REPORTING -Attorney General's Office regarding Rule 84 of the Model Rules of Professional Conduct contains the following statements on attorney misconduct-18 USC Chapter 47 - FRAUD AND FALSE STATEMENTS
To: "pennsylvania health, Abuse<ncea@nasua.org>, ACE <acepresident@acecashexpress.com>,, ACE <acepresident@acecashexpress.com>, ACES, <aces@childsupport-aces.org>, ACESGROUP, <aceschildsupportenews-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com>, ACLU, <aclufl@aclufl.org><paffairs@oig.hhs.gov>, Environmental Justice, <environmental-justice@epa.gov>, Ethics <contactOGE@oge.gov>,, Ethics <ethics@indiana.edu>, family violence, <fvdinfo@ncjfcj.org>, Federal Victims" <victimsrights@ic.fbi.gov>, contact@nw3c.org

http://www.floridabar.org/divexe/rrtfb.nsf/FV/0B6C8E5CDCA464D685257172004B0FBD

4-8 MAINTAINING THE INTEGRITY OF THE PROFESSION
RULE 4-8.4 MISCONDUCT
A lawyer shall not:
(a) violate or attempt to violate the Rules of Professional Conduct, knowingly assist or induce another to do so, or do so through the acts of another;
(b) commit a criminal act that reflects adversely on the lawyer's honesty, trustworthiness, or fitness as a lawyer in other respects;
(c) engage in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation, except that it shall not be professional misconduct for a lawyer for a criminal law enforcement agency or regulatory agency to advise others about or to supervise another in an undercover investigation, unless prohibited by law or rule, and it shall not be professional misconduct for a lawyer employed in a capacity other than as a lawyer by a criminal law enforcement agency or regulatory agency to participate in an undercover investigation, unless prohibited by law or rule;
(d) engage in conduct in connection with the practice of law that is prejudicial to the administration of justice, including to knowingly, or through callous indifference, disparage, humiliate, or discriminate against litigants, jurors, witnesses, court personnel, or other lawyers on any basis, including, but not limited to, on account of race, ethnicity, gender, religion, national origin, disability, marital status, sexual orientation, age, socioeconomic status, employment, or physical characteristic;
(e) state or imply an ability to influence improperly a government agency or official or to achieve results by means that violate the Rules of Professional Conduct or other law;
(f) knowingly assist a judge or judicial officer in conduct that is a violation of applicable rules of judicial conduct or other law;
(g) fail to respond, in writing, to any official inquiry by bar counsel or a disciplinary agency, as defined elsewhere in these rules, when bar counsel or the agency is conducting an investigation into the lawyer's conduct. A written response shall be made:(1) within 15 days of the date of the initial written investigative inquiry by bar counsel, grievance committee, or board of governors;
(2) within 10 days of the date of any follow-up written investigative inquiries by bar counsel, grievance committee, or board of governors;
(3) within the time stated in any subpoena issued under these Rules Regulating The Florida Bar (without additional time allowed for mailing);
(4) as provided in the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure or order of the referee in matters assigned to a referee; and
(5) as provided in the Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure or order of the Supreme Court of Florida for matters pending action by that court.
Except as stated otherwise herein or in the applicable rules, all times for response shall be calculated as provided elsewhere in these Rules Regulating The Florida Bar and may be extended or shortened by bar counsel or the disciplinary agency making the official inquiry upon good cause shown.
Failure to respond to an official inquiry with no good cause shown may be a matter of contempt and processed in accordance with rule 3-7.11(f) of these Rules Regulating The Florida Bar.
(h) willfully refuse, as determined by a court of competent jurisdiction, to timely pay a child support obligation; or
(i) engage in sexual conduct with a client or a representative of a client that exploits or adversely affects the interests of the client or the lawyer-client relationship.
If the sexual conduct commenced after the lawyer-client relationship was formed it shall be presumed that the sexual conduct exploits or adversely affects the interests of the client or the lawyer-client relationship. A lawyer may rebut this presumption by proving by a preponderance of the evidence that the sexual conduct did not exploit or adversely affect the interests of the client or the lawyer-client relationship.
The prohibition and presumption stated in this rule do not apply to a lawyer in the same firm as another lawyer representing the client if the lawyer involved in the sexual conduct does not personally provide legal services to the client and is screened from access to the file concerning the legal representation.Comment
Lawyers are subject to discipline when they violate or attempt to violate the Rules of Professional Conduct, knowingly assist or induce another to do so, or do so through the acts of another, as when they request or instruct an agent to do so on the lawyer's behalf. Subdivision (a), however, does not prohibit a lawyer from advising a client concerning action the client is legally entitled to take, provided that the client is not used to indirectly violate the Rules of Professional Conduct.
Many kinds of illegal conduct reflect adversely on fitness to practice law, such as offenses involving fraud and the offense of willful failure to file an income tax return. However, some kinds of offense carry no such implication. Traditionally, the distinction was drawn in terms of offenses involving "moral turpitude." That concept can be construed to include offenses concerning some matters of personal morality, such as adultery and comparable offenses, that have no specific connection to fitness for the practice of law. Although a lawyer is personally answerable to the entire criminal law, a lawyer should be professionally answerable only for offenses that indicate lack of those characteristics relevant to law practice. Offenses involving violence, dishonesty, breach of trust, or serious interference with the administration of justice are in that category. A pattern of repeated offenses, even ones of minor significance when considered separately, can
indicate indifference to legal obligation.
A lawyer may refuse to comply with an obligation imposed by law upon a good faith belief that no valid obligation exists. The provisions of rule 4-1.2(d) concerning a good faith challenge to the validity, scope, meaning, or application of the law apply to challenges of legal regulation of the practice of law.
Subdivision (c) recognizes instances where lawyers in criminal law enforcement agencies or regulatory agencies advise others about or supervise others in undercover investigations, and provides an exception to allow the activity without the lawyer engaging in professional misconduct. The exception acknowledges current, acceptable practice of these agencies. Although the exception appears in this rule, it is also applicable to rules 4-4.1 and 4-4.3. However, nothing in the rule allows the lawyer to engage in such conduct if otherwise prohibited by law or rule.
Subdivision (d) of this rule proscribes conduct that is prejudicial to the administration of justice. Such proscription includes the prohibition against discriminatory conduct committed by a lawyer while performing duties in connection with the practice of law. The proscription extends to any characteristic or status that is not relevant to the proof of any legal or factual issue in dispute. Such conduct, when directed towards litigants, jurors, witnesses, court personnel, or other lawyers, whether based on race, ethnicity, gender, religion, national origin, disability, marital status, sexual orientation, age, socioeconomic status, employment, physical characteristic, or any other basis, subverts the administration of justice and undermines the public's confidence in our system of justice, as well as notions of equality. This subdivision does not prohibit a lawyer from representing a client as may be permitted by applicable law, such as, by way of
example, representing a client accused of committing discriminatory conduct.
Lawyers holding public office assume legal responsibilities going beyond those of other citizens. A lawyer's abuse of public office can suggest an inability to fulfill the professional role of attorney. The same is true of abuse of positions of private trust such as trustee, executor, administrator, guardian, or agent and officer, director, or manager of a corporation or other organization.
A lawyer's obligation to respond to an inquiry by a disciplinary agency is stated in subdivision (g) of this rule and subdivision (h)(2) of rule 3-7.6. While response is mandatory, the lawyer may deny the charges or assert any available privilege or immunity or interpose any disability that prevents disclosure of a certain matter. A response containing a proper invocation thereof is sufficient under the Rules Regulating The Florida Bar. This obligation is necessary to ensure the proper and efficient operation of the disciplinary system.
Subdivision (h) of this rule was added to make consistent the treatment of attorneys who fail to pay child support with the treatment of other professionals who fail to pay child support, in accordance with the provisions of section 61.13015, Florida Statutes. That section provides for the suspension or denial of a professional license due to delinquent child support payments after all other available remedies for the collection of child support have been exhausted. Likewise, subdivision (h) of this rule should not be used as the primary means for collecting child support, but should be used only after all other available remedies for the collection of child support have been exhausted. Before a grievance may be filed or a grievance procedure initiated under this subdivision, the court that entered the child support order must first make a finding of willful refusal to pay. The child support obligation at issue under this rule includes both domestic
(Florida) and out-of-state (URESA) child support obligations, as well as arrearages.
Subdivision (i) proscribes exploitation of the client or the lawyer-client relationship by means of commencement of sexual conduct. The lawyer-client relationship is grounded on mutual trust. A sexual relationship that exploits that trust compromises the lawyer-client relationship. Attorneys have a duty to exercise independent professional judgment on behalf of clients. Engaging in sexual relationships with clients has the capacity to impair the exercise of that judgment.FALSE STATEMENTS MISCONDUCT FALSE KIDNAPPING REPORTS TO LAW ENFORCEMENT AND TO THE JUVENILLE COURTLEGAL PHILANTHROPY MISUSE OF OFFICEINSTITUTIONAL CHILD ABUSELEGAL ABUSELAWYER MISCONDUCT ETHNIC BIASNESSMOCKERYTRIAL ERRORINTENTIONAL OMISSIONS ATTORNEY MISCONDUCT/ASSISTING CRIMINAL NONSUPPORT & CHILD SUPPORT RECOVERY ACT VIOLATIONS, FEDERAL CHILD SUPPORT COLLECTION LAWS, SOCIAL SECURITY ACT 654,655,666,NEGLIGENCE, ASSISTING JUDICIAL MISCONDUCT,BUSINESS TORT LAW VIOLATIONS

http://www.hinshawlaw.com/the-lawyers-lawyer-newsletter---recent-developments-in-risk-management-03-09-2012/ Duty to report misconduct; code of conducthttps://www.facebook.com/OrangeClerk?ref=ts#!/pages/Duty-to-report-misconduct/136147606416830?fref=ts&rf=144393985578228

---------- Forwarded message ----------From: Mary Sue Hamlet <mshamlet@twcny.rr.com>Date: Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 9:03 AMSubject: Re: ATTORNEY MISCONDUCT COMPLAINT- PEER REPORTING -Attorney General's Office regarding Rule 84 of the Model Rules of Professional Conduct contains the following statements on attorney misconduct-18 USC Chapter 47 - FRAUD AND FALSE STATEMENTSTo: Sheila Shaw <sdynastysheila@gmail.com>

Hello Sheila,
I spoke with you on the phone last week. I got another email, so I thought I would respond so you can see where it came from.
Please, please, please remove me from your assorted email lists.
Mary On Jul 12, 2013, at 10:37 AM, Sheila Shaw wrote:

400 W. Robinson St. (Hurston South Tower) Ste. # S-509, Orlando, FL 32801-1718

ATTORNEY MISCONDUCT/ASSISTING CRIMINAL NONSUPPORT & CHILD SUPPORT RECOVERY ACT VIOLATIONS, FEDERAL CHILD SUPPORT COLLECTION LAWS, SOCIAL SECURITY ACT 654,655,666,NEGLIGENCE, ASSISTING JUDICIAL MISCONDUCT,BUSINESS TORT LAW VIOLATIONShttp://www.hinshawlaw.com/the-lawyers-lawyer-newsletter---recent-developments-in-risk-management-03-09-2012/Duty to report misconduct; code of conducthttps://www.facebook.com/OrangeClerk?ref=ts#!/pages/Duty-to-report-misconduct/136147606416830?fref=ts&rf=144393985578228 ( TORT LAW: A tort is a civil wrong resulting from a violation of a legal right not created by contract for which monetary redress is provided. This may be (a) an act or (b) an omission. More formally, a tort may be defined as a wrongful act or omission arising in the course of social re ships other than contracts which violates a person's legally protected rights for which the law provides a remedy in the form of an action for damages.There are two basic
classifications of torts: (a) negligence which is the result of an unintentional act (b) intentional acts or omissions which results in a breach of someone's rights. There is a third group in this area that should be explained. It is referred to as strict liability.)8-2.241 Civil Laws Governing Law Enforcement MisconductAttorney Misconduct ComplaintTHERE HAS BEEN A BREACH OF DUTY/NEGLECT OF DUTY WHEREAS ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION WOULD HAVE REMEDIED AN EXTENSIVE DELAY IN PROVIDING ADEQUATE CHILD SUPPORT OR FINANCIAL SUPPORT. IT IS ALSO MORE THAT SUSPECTED THAT THE UNTIMELY DELAYS AREASSOCIATED WITH THE FOLLOWING BREACH(ES)

400 W. Robinson St. (Hurston South Tower) Ste. # S-509, Orlando, FL 32801-1718

----- Forwarded Message -----From: Sheila Shaw <nine09digits@yahoo.com>To: "nc100bw@nc100bwcincinnati.org" <nc100bw@nc100bwcincinnati.org>; "Information@ChicagoNCBW.org" <Information@ChicagoNCBW.org>; "info@ncbwde.org" <info@ncbwde.org>; "info@ncbwmanhattan.org" <info@ncbwmanhattan.org> Sent: Tuesday, July 2, 2013 2:33 PMSubject: Fw: is res ipsa loquitur- negligence- racial profiling comlaint

----- Forwarded Message -----From: Sheila Shaw <nine09digits@yahoo.com>To: "Joe.Follick@fldoe.org" <Joe.Follick@fldoe.org> Sent: Tuesday, June 18, 2013 2:42 PMSubject: Fw: is res ipsa loquitur- negligence- racial profiling comlaint

----- Forwarded Message -----From: Sheila Shaw <nine09digits@yahoo.com>To: NOW <florida_now_president@yahoo.com>; NOW <now@now.org>; Now <info@noworlando.org>; Philadelphia Now <philadelphianow@yahoo.com> Sent: Tuesday, June 18, 2013 9:52 AMSubject: Fw: is res ipsa loquitur- negligence- racial profiling comlaint

----- Forwarded Message -----From: Sheila Shaw <nine09digits@yahoo.com>To: gethelp@ncvc.org Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2013 9:26 PMSubject: Fw: is res ipsa loquitur- negligence- racial profiling comlaint

----Forwarded Message----From: nine09digits@yahoo.comTo: Robin.Rone@americanbar.org, Daniel.Serrano@americanbar.org, Rachel.Patrick@americanbar.org,diversity@americanbar.org, Deidra.Franklin@americanbar.org, Nicole.Rivera@americanbar.org,minorities@americanbar.orgSent: Thu, May 2, 2013 1:48 PM EDTSubject: Fw: is res ipsa loquitur- negligence- racial profiling comlaint

http://purehealthsystems.com/Banners/fgh2o2-yellow.gif
----- Forwarded Message -----From: Sheila Shaw <nine09digits@yahoo.com>To: police misconduct <simpson@civilrights.org>; police misconduct <community.newark@usdoj.gov>; police misconduct <Special.Litigation@usdoj.gov>; police misconduct <freedman@voicenet.com>; police misconduct <nacole@nacole.org>; police misconduct <policeoversight@yahoogroups.com>; police misconduct <detcoalition@att.net>; police misconduct <media@aclu.org>; police misconduct <cleslie@midwesthumanrights.org>; police misconduct <info@nacole.org>; police misconduct <justcause@lawcollective.org>; police misconduct <jfloyd@JohnTFloyd.com>; POLICE MISCONDUCT <isha@cs.com>; police misconduct <media@judicialwatch.org>; police misconduct <citizensnvw@bellsouth.net>; police misconduct <info@aele.org>; "watchdog@journalsentinel.com" <watchdog@journalsentinel.com>; Domestic Violence <media@ndvh.org>; police misconduct <media@judicialwatch.org>; police misconduct <media@aclu.org>;
"media@bradynetwork.org" <media@bradynetwork.org>; "media@ncmec.org" <media@ncmec.org>;"media@defenselink.mil" <media@defenselink.mil> Sent: Tuesday, April 23, 2013 4:27 PMSubject: is res ipsa loquitur- negligence- racial profiling comlaint

Negligence can be proven with circumstantial evidence and one type is res ipsa loquitur. This is a latin term which means, "the thing (act) speaks for itself. There must be four elements present to prove or show negligence with this doctrine. They are:> > a) The accident could not have ordinarily occurred without someone being negligent.> b) The accident is caused by an instrumentality within the exclusive control of the defendant.> c) The injured party (plaintiff) did notcontribute to the negligence.d) The evidence as to the explanation of the accident is more available to the defendant than to the plaintiff.
INTIMATE PARTNER VIOLENCEIPVEXINTIMATE RETALIATORY DONSTIC VIOLENCSubject: VAWA,MISCONDUCT BY PRINCIPAL JUDICIAL LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER ORADMINISTRATOR, JUDICIAL HEARING OFFICE TO ASSIST AND EVADE CRIMINAL CHARGES AGAINST THE OBLIGOR/ ASSISTING CRIMINAL ACTIVITY BY THE OBLIGOR INCLUDING NEGLECT, NEGLIGENCE, CHILD ABUSE FAMILY DOMESTIC VIOLENCE COMPLAINTANT: DR. SHEILA JOCELYN SHAW, DBASUBJECT OF COMPLAINT VAWA, FALSE REPORTNEGLIGENCE-MISCONDUCT BYPRINCIPAL JUDICIAL LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER /ADMINISTRATOR, JUDICIAL HEARING OFFICER, TO ASSIST AND EVADE CRIMINAL CHARGES AGAINST THE OBLIGOR/ ASSISTING CRIMINAL ACTIVITY BY THE OBLIGOR INCLUDING NEGLECT, NEGLIGENCE,CHILD ABUSE FAMILY DOMESTIC VIOLENCE regarding false complaint/perjury by CPI(CPI 5617503201,COLOR OF LAW, RISS USED TO ASSIST CRIMINAL NONSUPPORT practioner visit on 02/03/2011) and Principal;the following statement was provided by the PRINCIPAL authority of whom Orange County Home
Education(School Choice) office is governed whereas not one inquiry was made or requested from DCF or the court,notone inquiry or request was made to the children's practicioners, regarding a threshold rather fabrication of new medical records ascertained in 2010 long after neonatal,immunization records, daycare physicals had been obtained for ten years plus, none of which were presented by DCF as demonstrative records to evident any suchallegations were true.INTENTIONAL OMISSIONS RESULTING IN MATERNAL INJURY AND LEGAL ERROR, including the following statement and letter:On Thu, 2/3/11, Bernier, Christopher S. <christopher.bernier@ocps.net> wrote:From: Bernier, Christopher S. <christopher.bernier@ocps.net> Subject: RE: Home School Enrollment To: "'nine09digits@yahoo.com'" <nine09digits@yahoo.com> Cc: "Shoemaker, Toney" <toney.shoemaker@ocps.net>Date: Thursday, February 3, 2011,9:16 AM Dr Shaw, We are inreceipt of your hand written note. In reading it
carefully, we have no understanding of the DCF complaint or your issues related to Ferncreek. We have no documentation of such. We suggest you follow those issues up with Ferncreek or the learning community office. We would like to thank you and confirm we havereceived enrollment/transcript information for your student for the 2008-2009 school year. Again, we are more than happy to take your student and wish to not frustrate you, but the information we have been seeking is for the 2006 – 2007 and 2007-2008schoolyears. Please see highlighted section in email below. Please callus so we can end the confusion and reach a solution so your child can enroll.Christopher Bernier Principal School Choice Services 407-317-3200 ext 2706FURTHER MISCONDUCT WAS CONTINUED WTH AN ABATEMENT TO STOP COLLECTION OF TEN PLUS YEARS OF CHILD SUPPORT AND RECOVERY FEES OWED BY THE OBLIGOR IN CHILD SUPPORT CASES INVOLVINGTHE SAME CHILDREN IN ALLEGATIONS OF KIDNAPPING AND CHILD
ABUSE CLAIMS, FALSELY MADE BY THE CPI.INVOLVING CASES: Register of ActionsCase No. 2010-DR-000170-OSHAW, SHEILA JOCELYN KARENA vs. WILLIAMS, JARRID DESHAUN § § § § § § § Case Type: Child Support DOR Date Filed: 01/06/2010 Location: Div 42 Judicial Officer: Evans, Robert MUniform Case Number: 482010DR000170A001OX AND CASE NUMBERS Case Type: Paternity DOR Date Filed: 08/29/2005 Location: Div 42 Judicial Officer: Evans, Robert M Uniform Case Number: 482005DR014270A001OXRelated Case Information Related Cases 2002-DR-006249-O (Paternity) PartyInformation Lead Attorneys Petitioner SHAW, SHEILA JOCELYN BARBARA FANCHER(LIMITED) JONES, Esquire Retained 407-849-1133(W)Misuse of office color of law manipulation of records DCF RFA case..Registers of action involving criminal judicial misconduct, pricipa judicial illegal conduct, nonprofit noncompliance with the MODELNONPROFIT CORPORATION ACT 1987 CASE NUMBERS 482002DR00626249A001OX AND CASE NUMBER
2005DR14720-O CARLOS ALBERTO GONZALEZ OBLIGOR 582676689 Registers of action involving criminal judicial misconduct, pricipa judicial illegal conduct, nonprofit noncompliance with the MODEL NONPROFIT CORPORATION ACT 1987 CASE NUMBERS 482002DR00626249A001OX AND CASE NUMBER 2005DR14720-O CARLOS ALBERTO GONZALEZ OBLIGOR 582676689..Family violence against the minor's sibling cases number 05-DR- 014270, VAWA EXINTIMATE PARTNER RETALIATORY VIOLENCE CRIMINAL ENTERPRISINGHISTORY FEDERAL DOC NUMBER G17259 JARRID DESHAUN WILLIAMS DEADBEAT CASE NUMBER482010DR000170A00-OX, 　　 Why is HSLDA Involved in CPS Investigations?In the late 1980s and early 1990s, investigations ofhomeschooling families were common because people who either did not understand homeschooling or were opposed to it reported these families for educational neglect and truancy. HSLDA defended many familiesfaced with investigations, even appearing in court on their behalf to prove that
homeschoolers were doing anything but neglecting their children’s education. HSLDA has also worked tirelessly to decrease the number of unnecessary CPS investigations by ensuring that adequate measures are in place to protect innocent families from what can be a traumatic intrusion into their private lives. In 2001, HSLDA lobbied Congress to include a variety of safeguards in the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act (CAPTA), the federal legislation thatprovides funding for social services departments. While Congress did not includeall of our suggested reforms, two of the most important—socialworker training in family rights and mandatory disclosure ofallegations to the accused—were included in the Keeping Children and Families Safe Act of 2003. How Frequently are Homeschoolers Investigated? It is impossible to know how many homeschooling families areinvestigated for child abuse and neglect, but in HSLDA’s experience, the number of
investigations initiated solely because a family has chosen to homeschool has significantly declined over the past 30 years. However, many innocent families are still wrongly reported. Statistics show that up to 60 percent of children removed from their homes by social workers were taken away from their parents without probable cause to suspect abuse. Approximately 30 percent of reports that are investigated include only one child found to be a victim ofabuse or neglect. Fifty-eight percent of the reports are found unsubstantiated.1When homeschooling families are reported for abuse or neglect,the allegations often include a mention of school attendance as well asother accusations, and in most cases, they are unfounded. Unfortunately, allegations are often made by family members, neighbors, or acquaintances who are upset with the family and use the child welfaresystem for retaliation. It is important to note that some states have statutory penalties for
knowingly making a false report. Over the years, HSLDA has represented thousands of families during CPS investigations. Our lawyers have also litigated and won a number of cases on behalf of homeschoolers (search active cases or our archives). Are CPS Investigations Legal? While social workers are required by law to investigate tips of abuse and neglect, they are still not free from the constraints of the Fourth Amendment—thus, there isboth a legal and an illegal way to conduct them. In his article, "The FourthAmendment’s Impact on Child Abuse Investigations," MichaelFarris explains the balance of the state’s responsibility with individual and familyrights, stating that in a 1999 decision, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit said it best, "The government’s interest in the welfare of children embraces not only protectingchildren from physical abuse, but also protecting children’s interest in the privacy and dignity of their
homes and in the lawfully exercised authority of their parents."2 In general, unreasonable searches and seizures are banned under the Fourth Amendment, and all warrantless searches are presumptively unreasonable. There are, however, two recognized exceptions to the warrant requirement for child abuse investigation: 1) If the adult in charge of the premises gives the social worker his/her free and voluntary consent to enterthe home; or 2) If the social worker possesses evidence that meets twostandards: a) It satisfies the legal standard of establishingprobable cause; and b) The evidence demonstrates that there are exigent circumstances relative to thehealth of the children. In other words, if a parent gives a social worker permission for entry into the home, then the social worker is acting legally. If the parent denies permission, thesocial worker can attempt to obtain a warrant, and the social worker can enter with that or with probable cause that
exigent circumstances exist. What Should Homeschoolers Do? Make sure you know the specific statutes of your state. Child "abuse" and "neglect" are terms defined in and governed by state statutes. In the event of an investigation on your family, do not give the social worker permission to enter your home, and call HSLDA immediately. You may also find it helpful to review HSLDA’s article "The Social Worker AtYour Door: 10 Helpful Hints" (a members-only resource). What is HSLDA doingto improve the situation? HSLDA is always seeking toimprove child welfare laws at both the state and federal levels. Some of the measures we would like to see enacted are:1) CPS may only place founded reports on the state's central registry of child abuse and neglect. (In some states, unfounded reports are placed on the central registry, which not onlycauses harm to innocent people but is also a violation of due process.) 2) Caseworkers must inform families if a report is
anonymous. (There is a difference between anonymous and confidential—reporters’ names should be kept confidential, but anonymous reports are not as reliable as those made by known reporters.) 3) Parents must be allowed to select an unrelated adult to be present during interviews of their children. 4) Investigations must cease immediately upon discovery that the allegations are false. Continuingthe investigation process despite proof of innocence only traumatizes thefamily and wastes state resources. 5) Parents musthave access to the records of their investigations. HSLDA also continues to assist with incorporating the following two federal CAPTArequirements into state codes: 1) Requiring child protective services workers to be trained in their duty to protect the statutory and constitutional rights of those they areinvestigating. 2) Requiring child protective services personnel to advise individuals subject to a child abuse and neglect investigation
of the complaint or allegation made against them. Notes 1. Children’s Bureau. (2003). Child Maltreatment. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Retrieved fromhttp://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/pubs/cm03/index.htm. 2. Calabretta v. Floyd, 189 F.3d 808 (1999). 　 Search Menu Refine Search Back Location : Orange County Register of ActionsCase No. 2002-DR-006249-OSHAW, SHEILA J vs. GONZALEZ, CARLOS A § § § § § § § Case Type: Paternity Date Filed: 04/24/2002 Location: Div 38 Judicial Officer: Kest, Sally D M Uniform Case Number: 482002DR006249A001OX Related Case Information Related Cases 2005-DR-014270-O (Paternity) Party InformationLead Attorneys Petitioner SHAW, SHEILA J BARBARA FANCHER (LIMITED)JONES, EsquireRetained 407-849-1133(W) Respondent GONZALEZ, CARLOS A RUSSELL SCOTT HERSHKOWITZ, Esquire Retained 407-786-2889(W) Events & Orders of the Court DISPOSITIONS 11/10/2004 Final Order of Dismissal After Hearing OTHER EVENTS AND
HEARINGS 01/01/2007 Case Reassigned to Division Case Reassigned to Division|CASE REASSIGNED TO JUDGE 38 02/11/2005 Notice Notice|NOTICE OF CONCLUSION OF REPRESENTATION 11/10/2004 Final Order of Dismissal After Hearing Final Order of Dismissal After Hearing|FINAL ORDER OF DISMISSAL AFTERHEARING RECORDED 09/24/2004 Affidavit Affidavit|AFFIDAVIT TOTERMINATE PARENTAL RIGHTS 09/24/2004 Court Minutes Court Minutes|MINUTES HEARING09/24/2004 Status Hearing (9:00 AM) (Judicial Officers Deactivated, Deactivated, Deactivated, Deactivated, Deactivated, Deactivated, Smith, Maura T) 09/13/2004 Pluries Summons Unserved Pluries Summons Unserved|8TH PLURIES SUMMONSUNSERVED 07/28/2004 Pluries Summons Served Pluries Summons Served|7THPLURIES SUM SVD 6/22/2004 07/27/2004 Notice of Hearing Notice of Hearing|NOTICE OF HEARING [09/24/2004] 09:00 A.M. 07/16/2004 Motion to Dismiss Motion to Dismiss|MOTION TO DISMISS 07/14/2004 Notice Appearance of Counsel Notice Appearance of
Counsel|NOTICE OF APPEARANCE OF COUNSEL (ATTY HERSHKOWITZ) 07/14/2004 Notice of Unavailability Notice of Unavailability|NOTICE OF NON-AVAILABILITY (ATTY HERSHKOWITZ) 07/01/2004 Pluries Summons Issued Pluries Summons Issued|8TH PLURIES SUMMONS ISSUED 07/01/2004 Affidavit ofLost/Destroyed Instrument Affidavit of Lost/DestroyedInstrument|AFFIDAVIT OF LOST SUMMONS 04/16/2004 Pluries Summons Issued Pluries SummonsIssued|7TH PLURIES SUMMONS ISSUED 01/06/2004 Returned Mail Returned Mail|RETURNED MAIL OF 12/26/2003 Notice of Action Issued Notice of Action Issued|NOTICE SUIT 1 PUB (1) MLD RET: 2/5/04 12/26/2003 Affidavit Affidavit|AFFIDAVIT OF DILIGENTSEARCH & INQUIRY 12/26/2003 Certificate of Mailing Certificateof Mailing|CERTIFICATE OF MAILING 10/13/2003 Pluries Summons Unserved Pluries Summons Unserved|6TH PLURIES SUMMONS UNSERVED 09/12/2003 Pluries Summons Issued Pluries Summons Issued|6TH PLURIES SUMMONS ISSUED 09/03/2003 Motion for Default Motion for
Default|MOTION FOR DEFAULT (NOT ENTERED/NO RETURN OF SERVICE) 09/03/2003 Motion Motion |MOTION TO AMEND MOTION FOR DEFAULT 09/03/2003 Affidavit Affidavit|AFFIDAVIT AND MOTION FOR WAIVER OF FEES FOR PETITION FO MOTION DEFAULT 09/03/2003 Motion for DefaultMotion for Default|MOTION FOR DEFAULT (NOT ENTERED/NO RETURNOF SERVICE) 09/03/2003 Motion Motion |AMENDMENT TO MOTION FOR DEFAULT MOTION TOESTABLISH PATERNITY ETC 09/03/2003 Affidavit Affidavit|AFFIDAVIT AND MOTION FOR WAIVER OF FEES FOR PETITION FO MOTION DEFAULT 09/03/2003 Pluries Summons Unserved Pluries Summons Unserved|5TH PLURIES SUMMONS UNSERVED 08/04/2003 Pluries Summons Issued PluriesSummons Issued|5TH PLURIES SUMMONS ISSUED 07/31/2003 Requestfor Admissions Request for Admissions |AMENDED REQUEST FOR ADMISSIONS 06/09/2003 Pluries Summons Unserved Pluries Summons Unserved|4TH PLURIES SUMMONS UNSERVED 05/21/2003 Pluries Summons Issued Pluries Summons Issued|4TH PLURIES SUMMONS ISSUED 05/01/2003
Third Party Summons Third Party Summons |3rd plurries SUMMONS RETURNED UNSERVED 02/11/2003 Pluries Summons Issued Pluries Summons Issued|3RD PLURIES SUMMONS ISSUED 12/26/2002 Pluries Summons Served Pluries Summons Served|2ND PLURIES SUM SVD11/21/2002 RET: 12/11/2002 11/08/2002 Pluries Summons IssuedPluries Summons Issued|2ND PLURIES SUMMONS ISSUED 09/24/2002 Pluries SummonsUnserved Pluries Summons Unserved|PLURIES SUMMONS UNSERVED 08/30/2002 Pluries Summons Issued Pluries Summons Issued|PLURIES SUMMONS ISSUED 07/29/2002 Summons Returned Summons Returned|ALIAS SUMMONS RETURNED UNSERVED 07/03/2002 Alias Summons Issued Alias SummonsIssued|ALIAS SUMMONS ISSUED 05/15/2002 Summons Returned SummonsReturned|SUMMONS UNSERVED 04/24/2002 Initial Judge Assigned Initial Judge Assigned|INITIAL JUDGE ASSIGNED MACKINNON, C Z 30 04/24/2002 Petition Petition|PETITION FILED 04/24/2002 Civil Cover Sheet Civil Cover Sheet|CIVIL COVER SHEET FILED 04/24/2002 Financial
Affidavit Financial Affidavit|FINANCIAL AFFIDAVIT 04/24/2002 Certificate of Compliance Certificate of Compliance|CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE 04/24/2002 Affidavit of Need Affidavit of Need|AFFIDAVIT OF NEED 04/24/2002 Request forAdmissions Request for Admissions |REQUEST FOR ADMISSIONS 04/24/2002Affidavit of Non Military Service Affidavit of Non MilitaryService|AFFIDAVIT OF NON MILITARY SERVICE 04/24/2002 Summons Issued Summons Issued|SUMMONS ISSUED Search Menu Refine Search Back Location : Orange County Register of ActionsCase No. 2005-DR-014270-OSHAW, SHEILA JOCELYN vs. GONZALEZ, CARLOS ALBERTO § § § § § § § Case Type:Paternity DOR Date Filed: 08/29/2005 Location: Div 42 JudicialOfficer: Evans, Robert M Uniform Case Number: 482005DR014270A001OX Related Case Information Related Cases 2002-DR-006249-O (Paternity) Party Information Lead Attorneys Petitioner SHAW, SHEILA JOCELYN BARBARA FANCHER (LIMITED) JONES, Esquire Retained 407-849-1133(W)
Respondent GONZALEZ, CARLOS ALBERTO Events & Orders of the Court DISPOSITIONS 05/15/2012 Order Denying (Judicial Officer: Evans, Robert M) Comment (Petitioner's Motion/Writ of Habeas Corpus Contesting Custody Order)09/19/2011 Report/Recommendation/Hearing & Order (Judicial Officer:Evans, Robert M) Comment (Denying Petitioner's Writ ofHabeas Corpus/Contempt of Court Order) 03/30/2011 Report/Recommendation/Hearing & Order (Judicial Officer: Evans, Robert M) Comment (Final Order on Motion to Set Arrears) 02/17/2011 Final Order (Judicial Officer: Evans, Robert M) Comment (on motion withdrawal of motion to set reserved arrears)10/22/2010 Report/Recommendation and Final Judgment(Judicial Officer: Roche, Renee A) Comment (Petition for Support) 05/09/2006 Final Judgment OTHER EVENTS AND HEARINGS 08/07/2012 Letter to Judge Evans (Faxed) w/attached Re: Child Support 05/07/2012 Civil Cover Sheet 05/07/2012 Motion for writ of Habeas Corpus contesting custody
order/Modification of visitation w/att (Re-Closed 5/15/12) 05/07/2012 Birth Certificate as to Male Child 04/02/2012 Motion for writ habeas corpus contesting custodu order w/att (Re-Closed 5/15/12)04/02/2012 Notice of Change of Address 12/05/2011 Letter Amended Letter/Writof Habeas Corpus to Hearing Officer/Court11/14/2011 Notice of Change of Address 09/14/2011 Writ of Habeas Corpus contempt of court order w/att (Re-Closed 09/19/11) 09/12/2011 Writ of Habeas Corpus contempt of court order w/att (Re-Closed 09/19/11) 09/12/2011 Writ of Habeas Corpus contempt of court order w/att (Re-Closed 09/19/11) 04/06/2011 Returned Mail03/28/2011 Motion (8:00 AM) (Judicial OfficerWinslow, George) Result: Report and Recommendation 03/28/2011 Court Minutes 03/28/2011 Supplemental Financial Statement 03/28/2011 Notice to Depository Request for Multiple Adjustments to Collections 03/28/2011 Certified Notice of Delinquent Support 03/28/2011 Child Support Information Sheet
03/22/2011 Returned Mail 03/11/2011 Motion Set Arrears/Repayment and Notice of Hearing on 3/28/11 @ 8am in Rm 540 (Re-Closed 03/30/11) 02/24/2011 Copy/Copies of Child Support andFederal Law 02/24/2011 Memorandum from Office of the Attorney General Re:Prosecutive Guidelines & Procedures forChild Support Recovery Act of 1992 02/24/2011 Notice of Change of Address 02/23/2011 Answer 02/18/2011 Alias Summons Returned Served 7/28/10 02/14/2011 Motion (8:00 AM) (Judicial Officer Winslow, George) Result: No Action 01/14/2011 Returned Mail 01/04/2011 Motion Set Arrears/Repayment Reserved (reclosed 2/17/11) 01/04/2011 Notice ofHearing 2/14/11 @ 8am 11/29/2010Notice of Change of Address 10/22/2010 Order for Income Deduction 10/19/2010 Petition/Motion (1:00 PM) (Magistrate Winslow, George) Parties Present Result: Report and Recommendation 10/19/2010 Child Support Information Sheet 10/19/2010 Child Support Information Sheet 10/19/2010 Exhibit(s) Pet #2 (Support
Guidelines Worksheet) 10/19/2010 Exhibit(s) Pet #1 (Supplemental Financial Statement) 10/19/2010 Court Minutes 10/08/2010 Returned Mail 09/20/2010 Order for NonJury Trial 10/19/10 @ 1pm. Rm.540 09/17/2010 Notice for Trial Non-Jury08/12/2010 Response with Regards to SummonsReceived Regarding Child Support 06/14/2010 Alias Summons Issued 04/09/2010 Summons Returned Unserved 12/17/2009 Request for Admissions (supplemental support) to 12/17/2009 Petition supplemental for support & other relief (Re-Closed 10/22/10) 12/17/2009 Financial Affidavit 12/17/2009 Certificate of Compliance 12/17/2009 Summons Issued re:supplemental petition for support11/01/2006 Notice of Change of Address Notice of Change of Address|NOTICE CHANGE OF ADDRESS 09/28/2006 HRS673 to Bureau HRS673 to Bureau|HRS673 TO BUREAU 07/19/2006 Letter Letter|LETTER FILED FROM JUDICIAL ASSISTANT 07/19/2006 Letter Letter|LETTER FILED TO JUDGE RE: CHILD SUPPORT 05/09/2006 Final Judgment Final
Judgment|FINAL JUDGMENT PATERNITY RECORDED 05/09/2006 Disposed by Non-Jury Trial Disposed by Non-Jury Trial|DISPOSED BY NON JURY TRIAL 05/09/2006Order for Income Deduction Order for Income Deduction|ORDER FOR INCOMEDEDUCTION 05/08/2006 HRS673 to Bureau HRS673to Bureau|HRS673 TO BUREAU 04/28/2006 Court Minutes Court Minutes|MINUTES HEARING 04/28/2006 Affidavit Affidavit|STATE CASE REGISTRY INFORMATION 04/28/2006 Affidavit Affidavit|FINANCIAL STATEMENT 04/28/2006 Status Hearing (8:00 AM) (Judicial Officers Deactivated, Deactivated, Deactivated, Deactivated, Deactivated, Deactivated, Roche, Renee A) 04/28/2006Non-Jury Trial (8:00 AM)(Judicial Officers Deactivated, Deactivated, Deactivated, Deactivated, Deactivated, Deactivated, Roche, Renee A) 03/29/2006 Request to Produce Request to Produce|REQUEST TO PRODUCE TO 03/29/2006 Notice for Trial Notice for Trial|NOTICE FOR NON JURY TRIAL 03/29/2006 Notice of Hearing Notice of Hearing|NOTICE OF HEARING *
04/28/2006 08:00 A.M. 03/29/2006 Order for Non Jury Trial Order for Non Jury Trial|ORDER FOR NON JURY TRIAL [04/28/2006] 08:00 A.M.03/28/2006 Notice of Filing HLA Tissue Typing Notice of Filing HLA TissueTyping|NOTICE FILING HLA TISSUE TYPING03/28/2006 Request for Admissions Request for Admissions |REQUEST FOR ADMISSIONS TO 02/09/2006 Notice Notice|NTS OF PARENTAGE TESTING APPOINTMENT 03/01/06 @ 1:20 P.M. 01/10/2006 HRS673 to Bureau HRS673 to Bureau|HRS673 TO BUREAU 01/05/2006 Child Support Information Sheet Child Support Information Sheet|CHILD SUPPORT INFORMATION SHEET 01/05/2006 Child Support InformationSheet Child SupportInformation Sheet|CHILD SUPPORT INFORMATION SHEET 01/05/2006 Financial Affidavit Financial Affidavit|SUPPLEMENTAL FINANCIAL STATEMENT 01/05/2006 Court Minutes Court Minutes|MINUTES HEARING 01/05/2006 Non-Jury Trial (9:00 AM) (Judicial Officers Roche, Renee A, Deactivated, Deactivated, Deactivated, Deactivated, Deactivated,
Deactivated) 01/05/2006 Status Hearing (9:00 AM) (Judicial Officers Roche, Renee A, Deactivated, Deactivated, Deactivated,Deactivated, Deactivated, Deactivated) 12/06/2005 Notice for Trial Notice forTrial|NOTICE FOR NON JURY TRIAL12/06/2005 Request to Produce Request to Produce|REQUEST TO PRODUCE TO 12/06/2005 Order for Non Jury Trial Order for Non Jury Trial|ORDER FOR NON JURY TRIAL [01/05/2006] 09:00 A.M. 12/06/2005 Notice of Hearing Notice of Hearing|NOTICE OF HEARING * 01/05/2006 09:00 A.M. 12/05/2005 Answer Answer|ANSWER 10/31/2005 Summons Returned Summons Returned|SUMMONS SERVED [10/10/2005] 10/31/2005Summons ReturnedSummons Returned|SUMMONS SERVED [10/10/2005] 10/27/2005 Answer Denying Allegations Answer Denying Allegations|ANSWER DENYING ALLEGATIONS 08/29/2005 Initial Judge Assigned Initial Judge Assigned|INITIAL JUDGE ASSIGNED EVANS, ROBERT M 42 08/29/2005 Petition Petition|PETITION - DOR 08/29/2005 Civil Cover Sheet Civil Cover Sheet|CIVIL
COVER SHEET FILED 08/29/2005 Notice of Social Security Notice of Social Security|NOTICE OF SOCIAL SECURITY08/29/2005 Financial Affidavit Financial Affidavit|FINANCIAL AFFIDAVIT 08/29/2005Certificate of ComplianceCertificate of Compliance|CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE 08/29/2005 Request for Admissions Request for Admissions |REQUEST FOR ADMISSIONS TO 08/29/2005 Summons Issued Summons Issued|SUMMONS ISSUED Financial Information Petitioner SHAW, SHEILA JOCELYN Total Financial Assessment 50.00 Total Payments and Credits 0.00 Balance Due as of 11/14/2012 50.00 09/12/2011 Transaction Assessment 50.00 　　　　　　　　　　　　　 Search Menu Refine Search Back Location : Orange County Register of ActionsCase No. 2010-DR-000170-OSHAW, SHEILA JOCELYN KARENA vs. WILLIAMS, JARRID DESHAUN § § § § § § § Case Type: Child Support DOR Date Filed: 01/06/2010 Location: Div 42 Judicial Officer: Evans, Robert M Uniform Case Number:
482010DR000170A001OX Related Case Information Related Cases 2011-DR-006367-O (Child Support) PartyInformation Lead Attorneys Petitioner SHAW, SHEILA JOCELYN KARENA ANA ELENA (LIMITED)TANGELRODRIGUEZ, Esquire Retained 407-849-1133(W) Respondent WILLIAMS, JARRID DESHAUN Events & Orders of the Court DISPOSITIONS 03/24/2011 Report/Recommendation/Hearing & Order (Judicial Officer: Evans, Robert M) Comment (Final Order on Motion to Set Arrears) 01/12/2011 Final Order (Judicial Officer: Evans, Robert M) Comment (on Withdrawal of Motion to Set ReservedArrears) 04/06/2010 Final Judgment (Judicial Officer:Roche,Renee A) Comment (for Support Recorded) OTHER EVENTS AND HEARINGS 08/02/2012 Answer w/att (Unsigned) 05/07/2012 Motion FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS 05/07/2012 Birth Certificate as to Female Child 04/23/2012 Summons Returned Unserved 04/12/2012 Summons Issued 04/11/2012 Request for Admissions (Support) 04/11/2012 Petition/Motion for Modification 04/11/2012
Civil Cover Sheet 04/02/2012 Motion for writ of habeas corpus constestingcustody order w/att 04/02/2012 Notice of Change of Address 11/14/2011 Notice of Change ofAddress 03/21/2011 Motion (1:30 PM) (Judicial Officer Winslow, George) Result: Report and Recommendation 03/21/2011 Court Minutes 03/15/2011 Returned Mail 03/02/2011 Motion Set Arrears/Repayment and Notice of Hearing on 3/21/11 @ 1:30pm in Rm 540 (Re-Closed 03/24/11) 03/01/2011 Civil Cover Sheet 01/10/2011 Motion (8:00 AM) (Judicial Officer Winslow, George) Result: NoAction 12/02/2010 Notice of Hearing on 1/10/11 @ 8am 12/01/2010Motion SetArrears/Repayment Reserved (Re-Closed 01/12/11) 12/01/2010 Civil Cover Sheet 11/29/2010 Notice of Change of Address 04/06/2010 Order for Income Deduction 03/31/2010 Petition/Motion (8:00 AM) () Parties Present Result: Report and Recommendation 03/31/2010 Supplemental Financial Statement 03/31/2010 Support Guidelines Worksheet 03/31/2010 Child Support
Information Sheet 03/31/2010 Child Support Information Sheet03/31/2010 Court Minutes 02/12/2010 Order for Non Jury Trial 3/31/10 @ 8am Rm.540 02/10/2010 Noticefor Trial Non Jury 02/04/2010 Summons Returned Served 1/16/10 01/28/2010 Answer w/att 01/06/2010 Summons Issued 01/06/2010 Civil Cover Sheet 01/06/2010 Petition FOR SUPPORT AND OTHER RELIEF 01/06/2010 Request for Admissions 01/06/2010 Financial Affidavit 01/06/2010 Certificate of Compliance Financial Information Respondent WILLIAMS, JARRID DESHAUN Total FinancialAssessment 15.00 Total Payments and Credits 15.00 Balance Due as of11/14/2012 0.0005/20/2010 Transaction Assessment 15.00 05/20/2010 Counter Payment Receipt # DR-2010-15610 WILLIAMS, JARRID DESHAUN (15.00)Friday9:30amSheila Shawhttps://www.facebook.com/pages/Duty-to-report-misconduct/136147606416830Duty to report misconductThe duty to report misconduct is oneof the ethical duties imposed on attorneys in the United States by the rules
governingprofessionalresponsibility. With certain exceptions, an attorney who becomes aware that either a fellow attorney or a judge has committed an act in violation of the rules of e...Page: 3 like thisSunday4:08pmSheila ShawOn Tuesday, October 23, 2012, Sheila Shaw <sdynastysheila@gmail.com> wrote:>---------- Forwardedmessage ----------> From: Sheila Shaw> Date: Tuesday, July 10, 2012> Subject: DUTY OF CARE/"REASONABLE PERSONS ...Fwd: NEGLIGENCE BY THE CPI CONT/REGARDING ADVANCE DIRECTIVES TREATMENT ON 2/3/2011. Fwd: MEDICAL MALPRACTICE SUIT/HCH ORLANDO NONPROFIT MALPRACTICE, PERJURY, RACIAL PROFILING COMPLAINT Fwd: 1996 reforms ... & Fwd:> To: federal inspector <donald.white@oig.hhs.gov> NO INQUIRY TO THE PRACTITIONERS REGARDING ADVANCE DIRECTIVES, PRESCRIPTIONS, EXISTING TREATMENT> SUCH AS THAT ON THE DAY OF ALLEGED "RISK OF HARM"- PATIENTS> MICHYL SHAW AND ISIS SHAW WERE SEEN ON THE DATE OF 02/03/2012> > NEGLIGENCE WHEREBY THE PATIENT'S
INSURANCE RECORDS ARE INDICATIVE OF THE PATIENT CARE HISTORIES, "REASONABLE PERSONS WOULD HAVEINQUIRED INTO ANY HEALTHTREATEMENT, OR INJURIES REPORTED BYAPRACTITIONER OR LONG TERM PROBLEMS- AND WHO WAS THE INSURED PARTIES, PARENT OR LEGAL CUSTODIAN ARRANGING FOR CARE, TREATMENT, APPOINTMENTS- > > absent advance directives from practioners of which the child was a patient> 9457320158 (RFA CASE NUMBER 1143172973)> medicaid records neonatal to date were omitted from case proceedings,> absent xraysregarding claim> FURTHERMANIPULATION OF RECORDS EXISTED BY HANDLEY REGARDING ABSENT INQUIRES DIRECTED TO AUTHORITATIVE OR LICENSED STAFF REGARDING ANYTHING OTHER THAN HEARSAY.> > > > ---------- Forwarded message ----------> From: Sheila Shaw <sdynastysheila@gmail.com> Date: Mon, Jul 9, 2012 at 1:58 PM> Subject: Fwd: NEGLIGENCE BY THE CPI CONT/REGARDING ADVANCE DIRECTIVES TREATMENTON2/3/2011. Fwd: MEDICAL MALPRACTICESUIT/HCH ORLANDO NONPROFITMALPRACTICE,
PERJURY, RACIAL PROFILING COMPLAINT Fwd: 1996 reforms ... & Fwd: WHAT IS DEFINED AS AN ACT OF HARM &> To: RThomas007@mac.com> ---------- Forwarded message ----------> From:Sheila Shaw <sdynastysheila@gmail.com> Date: Mon, Jul 9, 2012 at 1:48 PM> Subject: NEGLIGENCE BY THE CPI CONT/REGARDING ADVANCE DIRECTIVES TREATMENT ON 2/3/2011. Fwd: MEDICAL MALPRACTICE SUIT/HCH ORLANDO NONPROFIT MALPRACTICE, PERJURY, RACIAL PROFILING COMPLAINT Fwd: 1996 reforms ... & Fwd: WHAT IS DEFINED AS AN ACT OF HARM & RACIA> To: tampa.division@ic.fbi.gov, domestic coalition
<llevine@jwi.org>, agreenberg@jwi.org,crisis@866uswomen.org, info@ontherise.org, hubbardhouse@hubbardhouse.org, info@courtclasses.com,arcarot@nsu.law.nova.edu, williams@ouhsc.edu, acs@pcadv.org, rturckes@fletc.treas.gov,admin@ncjfcj.unr.edu, fnatalie@wfstone.com, info@nationalcenterdvtraumamh.org, mmclauglin@nnedv.org,rtolman@umich.edu, jedleson@umn.edu, media@ndvh.org, publicpolicy@ncadv.org, mainoffice@ncadv.org,info@legalproject.org, info <info@veilofinnocence.org>, icadv@violenceresource.org,info@preventchildabusenc.org, info@safenest.org, marsham@dvsolutions.org> Cc: compliance <compliance@report-it.com>, Administration@doh.state.fl.us, federal inspector <donald.white@oig.hhs.gov>, domestic <nationalsafeplace@ymcalouisville.org>, domestic <sportinsociety@neu.edu>, public policy <uspirg@pirg.org>, public policy <litigatio@citizen.org>, public policy <info@publicampaign.org>, Civil rights
<Edwin.Woo@hhs.gov>, civilrightscomplaint@nilc.org, ETHICS <Gary.Lindbergh@hhs.gov>, DEADBEAT DADS <RAADVP@aol.com>, deadbeat dad <action@ncpforce.com>, deadbeat dad <agency@ncpforce.com>, deadbeat dads <LizGoal@aol.com>, deadbeat dad <judges@ncpforce.com>, conlaw@hsdla.org, legalabuse@gmail.com> OVERVIEW OF NEGLIGENCE> FOR THE LEGAL INVESTIGATOR> By Ralph D. Thomas> Negligence is the largest area of tort litigation found today. The basicconceptin negligence is that the defendant acted with less care than is expected from a reasonable person. This reasonable person is an imaginarypersonused as a model in the negligence concept. Neg gence does not assume that the defendant's action that caused this liability imposed upon him was some thing he did on purpose. How ever, this general legal principle implies that the defendant failed to act or provide due care. Negligence then, is the unintentional failure of a defendant toact as a reasonable man would
causing harm to the plaintiff.> There is not another area within thelegal/investigative science that needs to be understood more than in the area of negligence. The legal investigator needs a basic understanding of this legal principle to investigate such a case. The volume of case assignments is high, more so than in any other area. This chapter will deal with those concepts most needed when it comes to theinvestigationof a negligence case.> UNDERSTANDING TORT LAW: A tort is a civil wrong resulting from a violation of a legal right not created by contract for which monetary redress is provided. This may be (a) an act or (b) an omission. More formally, a tort may be defined as a wrongful act or omission arising in the course of social re ships other than contracts which violates a person's legally protected rights for which the law provides a remedy in the form of an action fordamages.> There are two basic classifications of torts: (a) negligence which
is the result of an unintentionalact (b) intentional acts or omissions which results in a breach of someone's rights. There is a third group in this area that should be explained. It is referred to as strict liability.> UNDERSTANDING DIFFERENT DIVISIONS AND REALATING TOPICS: This description and any description of various legal principles as they relateto legalinvestigation found in this manual covers various points in general terms. Some states will apply one principle and another state another. It is up to the investigator to learn and understand which principles apply.> UNDERSTANDING NEGLIGENCE: Negligence is the failure to exercise that degree of which the law requires to protect others from unreasonable risk or harm. It will measure a person's act or omission against that of "a reasonably prudent man". Thismeasurement is against an unreal person who is used as a standard of conduct. It denotes the failure to act as a reasonably prudent man
wouldhave acted under similar circum stances.> DEGREE OF CARE: All that needs to be proven is that the defendant did not act as a reasonable prudent person would under like circum stances. The law of our land has imposed certain degrees of care that become issues under certain conditions. Some of these circumstances cancome out inthe actual investigation of the facts.> ABSOLUTE LIABILITY: Under some conditions, no neg gence need be shown because the defendant was involved in activity that imposes strict or absolute liability upon him. Under conditions which are dangerous in nature strict liability is generally imposed. To apply strict liability, one needs to consider the activity the defendant is involved in. The strict liability principle can be compared to the accidentalshooting in an armed robbery. Under such a condition, the criminal can be charged with murder and the mere fact that the shooting was an accident isimmaterial. Under certain
conditions, you can see absolute liability can be imposed even in the absence of neg gence.> In most cases, anyone who possesses, stores, maintains, or transports a dangerous instrumentality is absolutely or strictly liable for any injury or damage caused by the instrumentality, regardlessof the presenceor absence of due care.> CONTRIBUTORY OR COMPARATIVE NEGLIGENCE: see above> LAST CLEAR CHANCE: In this principle you might show that the plaintiff had the last clear chance to avoid the accident. In such a case, the defendant's liability could be diminished or omitted all together.> ASSUMPTION OF RISK: Under certain conditions it could be held that the plaintiff assumed the risk involved. In such a case, therewould be no liability. What this principle means is that, in advance, the plaintiff gave his consent to assume certain risks. What this really does is transfercertain duties from the defendant to the plaintiff. In other words, the plaintiff is then
responsible for himself. A good example of this would be owners of certain sinkholes in Florida used by scuba divers. The divers are almost always required to sign a statement that they are assuming all risks before they dive. However,the as tion ofrisks does not have to be in writing and can be implied.> PROXIMATE CAUSE: This has to do with the relationship between the failed duty of the defendant and the damage suffered by the plaintiff. There are thousands of cases each year where the plaintiff claims damages that were not the result of the actions or accident. In such a case, the defendant needs to show that certain of the plaintiff's damages were not the proximate cause of theaccident.> STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS: This has to do with the time limitation imposed upon the plaintiff to seek damages from the defendant. It often canbecome an issue in any negligence case. Dates and times are important. You will want to know the time limitations in your
area.> UNDERSTANDING THE LAST CLEAR CHANCE DOCTRINE> The law imposes a duty of "last clear chance" or requires each and every party to use due care for the safety ofthemselves and others.This is related to comparative and contributory neg gence. Under this doctrine, any party will have a legal duty to avoid an accident and failure to do so will create a liability. Such a doctrine is set up to avoid a situation where (for example) a person saw the opportunity for an accident to take place and he or she let it happen so damages could be collected.> UNDERSTANDING THE DOCTRINE OF RES IPSA LO QUTUR>Negligence can be proven with circumstantial evidence and one type is res ipsa loquitur. This is a latin term which means, "the thing (act) speaks for itself. There must be fourelements present to prove or show negligence with this doctrine. They are:> > a) The accident could not have ordinarily occurred without someone being negligent.> b) The accident is caused
by an instrumentality within the exclusive control of thedefendant.> c) The injured party(plaintiff) did not contribute to the negligence.d) The evidence as to the explanation of the accident is more available to the defendant than to the plaintiff.> > UNDERSTANDING DAMAGES> Damages have to have resulted in order for the plaintiff to collect anything from the defendant. In relationship to legal principles, there are two types of damages:> > (a)SPECIAL DAMAGES: These damages are direct dam ages. For example, in an auto accident they might be: damaged clothing, hospital bills, doctor's office bills, bills for drugs, repair of auto,rental of another vehicle, etc.> (b) PUNITIVE DAMAGES: These damages are not direct but have more to do with pain and suffering. Harder to measure, they can often times be higher than special damages.Punitive damages are more of a punishment of thedefendant.> > UNDERSTANDINGSUBROGATION> As stated a person can be held liable
for his or her acts or omissions and be charged with negligence. If the injured party chooses to recover from his own insurance company in part or in whole, then the insurance company in effect purchases the right to seek damages from the defendant. This is commonly referred to as subrogation. From an investigator's point of view, the insurance company will often times order anassets investigation before seeking legal action to determine if the third party has any attachable assets for subrogation.> Since negligence depends upon certain degrees of careimposed upon the tortfeasor, the degree of care required can and often does depend upon the relationship between the two parties involved. In other words, different yardsticks of measurement can be used against the tortfeasor depending upon the re ship betweenthe two parties. Facts concerning the relationship betweenparties involved need to be established to determine the "yardstick of measurement". Such
facts will establish the relationship into one of three classifications.> (A. invitee B. licensee C. trespasser).> INVITEE: An invitee is either a public invitee or a business visitor. A public invitee is one whom enters upon the defendant's land being a member of the general population. He enters upon the defendant's landas the land is opened to the general public. A business visitor is one who enters upon the land for some kind of direct or indirect business dealing with the owner. An invitee is given the greatestdegree of protection by the courts as far an negligence is concerned. Moreover, a business visitor is given the greatest degree of protection within the invitee concept. In other words, the degree of care might be different when a person is given a ride in avehicle if he compensated the owner for the ride than if hewas given a ride for free. Such hair-line cases come up daily in the field of negligence.> LICENSEE: A licensee is a person whom
enters upon property with an implied or express consent. An example of a licensee would be a social quest. Under most circumstances a licensee is expected to accept the property as he finds it and to look out for his own welfare. Under such circumstances, the knowledge of any danger known by thelicensee will preclude the licensee from any type of recovery. However, the owner will be required to inform and give warning to the licensee of any danger. Thus, the defendant would have a legal duty toinform the licensee of any dangers.> TRESPASSER: A trespasser is one who enters upon property without the implied or express consent of the owner. The owner or possessor of the land can not be held liable for any harm done by a trespasserand owes no duty to act as the reasonably prudent manwould.> --> Dr. Sheila Jocelyn Shaw>On Tuesday, October 23, 2012, Sheila Shaw <sdynastysheila@gmail.com> wrote:> ---------- Forwarded message ----------> From: Sheila Shaw>
Date: Tuesday, July 10, 2012> Subject: DUTY OF CARE/"REASONABLEPERSONS ...Fwd: NEGLIGENCE BY THE CPI CONT/REGARDING ADVANCE DIRECTIVESTREATMENT ON 2/3/2011. Fwd: MEDICAL MALPRACTICE SUIT/HCH ORLANDO NONPROFIT MALPRACTICE, PERJURY, RACIAL PROFILING COMPLAINT Fwd: 1996reforms ... & Fwd:> To:federal inspector <donald.white@oig.hhs.gov> NO INQUIRY TO THE PRACTITIONERS REGARDING ADVANCE DIRECTIVES, PRESCRIPTIONS,EXISTING TREATMENT> SUCH AS THAT ON THE DAY OF ALLEGED"RISK OF HARM"- PATIENTS> MICHYL SHAW AND ISIS SHAW WERE SEEN ON THE DATE OF 02/03/2012> > NEGLIGENCE WHEREBY THE PATIENT'S INSURANCE RECORDS ARE INDICATIVE OF THE PATIENT CARE HISTORIES, "REASONABLE PERSONS WOULD HAVE INQUIRED INTO ANY HEALTH TREATEMENT, OR INJURIES REPORTED BY A PRACTITIONER OR LONG TERM PROBLEMS- AND WHO WAS THE INSURED PARTIES, PARENT OR LEGAL CUSTODIAN ARRANGING FOR CARE, TREATMENT, APPOINTMENTS- > > absent advance directives from practioners of which the child wasa
patient> 9457320158 (RFA CASE NUMBER 1143172973)> medicaid records neonatal to date wereomitted from caseproceedings,> absent xrays regarding claim> FURTHER MANIPULATION OF RECORDS EXISTED BY HANDLEY REGARDING ABSENT INQUIRES DIRECTED TO AUTHORITATIVE OR LICENSED STAFF REGARDING ANYTHING OTHER THAN HEARSAY.> > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------->From: Sheila Shaw <sdynastysheila@gmail.com> Date: Mon, Jul 9, 2012 at 1:58 PM> Subject: Fwd: NEGLIGENCE BY THE CPI CONT/REGARDING ADVANCE DIRECTIVES TREATMENT ON 2/3/2011. Fwd: MEDICAL MALPRACTICE SUIT/HCH ORLANDO NONPROFIT MALPRACTICE, PERJURY, RACIAL PROFILING COMPLAINT Fwd: 1996 reforms ... & Fwd: WHAT IS DEFINED AS AN ACT OF HARM &> To: RThomas007@mac.com>---------- Forwarded message ----------> From:Sheila Shaw <sdynastysheila@gmail.com> Date: Mon, Jul 9, 2012 at 1:48 PM> Subject: NEGLIGENCE BY THE CPICONT/REGARDINGADVANCE DIRECTIVES TREATMENT ON 2/3/2011. Fwd: MEDICAL MALPRACTICE
SUIT/HCHORLANDO NONPROFIT MALPRACTICE, PERJURY, RACIAL PROFILING COMPLAINT Fwd: 1996 reforms ... & Fwd: WHAT IS DEFINED AS AN ACT OF HARM & RACIA> To: tampa.division@ic.fbi.gov, domestic coalition <llevine@jwi.org>, agreenberg@jwi.org,crisis@866uswomen.org, info@ontherise.org, hubbardhouse@hubbardhouse.org, info@courtclasses.com,arcarot@nsu.law.nova.edu, williams@ouhsc.edu, acs@pcadv.org, rturckes@fletc.treas.gov,admin@ncjfcj.unr.edu, fnatalie@wfstone.com, info@nationalcenterdvtraumamh.org, mmclauglin@nnedv.org,rtolman@umich.edu, jedleson@umn.edu, media@ndvh.org, publicpolicy@ncadv.org, mainoffice@ncadv.org,info@legalproject.org, info <info@veilofinnocence.org>, icadv@violenceresource.org,info@preventchildabusenc.org, info@safenest.org, marsham@dvsolutions.org> Cc: compliance <compliance@report-it.com>, Administration@doh.state.fl.us, federal inspector <donald.white@oig.hhs.gov>, domestic <nationalsafeplace@ymcalouisville.org>,
domestic <sportinsociety@neu.edu>, public policy <uspirg@pirg.org>, public policy <litigatio@citizen.org>, public policy <info@publicampaign.org>, Civil rights <Edwin.Woo@hhs.gov>, civilrightscomplaint@nilc.org, ETHICS <Gary.Lindbergh@hhs.gov>, DEADBEAT DADS <RAADVP@aol.com>, deadbeat dad <action@ncpforce.com>, deadbeat dad <agency@ncpforce.com>, deadbeat dads <LizGoal@aol.com>, deadbeat dad <judges@ncpforce.com>, conlaw@hsdla.org, legalabuse@gmail.com> OVERVIEW OFNEGLIGENCE> FORTHE LEGAL INVESTIGATOR> By Ralph D. Thomas> Negligence is the largest area of tort litigation found today. The basic conceptin negligence is that the defendant acted with less care than is expected from a reasonable person. This reasonable person is an imaginary person used as a model in the negligence concept. Neg gence does not assume that the defendant's action that caused thisliability imposed upon him was some thing he did on purpose. How ever, this general legal
principle implies that thedefendant failed to act or provide due care. Negligence then, is the unintentional failure of a defendant to act as a reasonable man would causing harm to the plaintiff.> There is not another area within the legal/investigative science that needs to be understood more than in the area of negligence. The legal investigator needs a basic understanding of this legal principle to investigatesuch a case. The volume of case assignments is high, more so than in any other area. This chapter will deal with those concepts most needed when it comes to the investigation of anegligence case.> UNDERSTANDING TORT LAW: A tort is a civil wrong resulting from a violation of a legal right not created by contract for which monetary redress is provided. This may be (a) an act or (b) an omission. More formally, a tort maybe defined as a wrongful act or omission arising in the course of social re ships other than contracts which violates aperson's
legally protected rights for which the law provides a remedy in the form of an action for damages.> There are two basic classifications of torts: (a) negligence which is the result of an unintentional act (b) intentional acts or omissions which results in a breach of someone's rights. There is a third group in this area that should be explained. It is referred to as strictliability.> UNDERSTANDING DIFFERENT DIVISIONS AND REALATING TOPICS: This description and any description of various legal principles as they relate to legal investigationfound in this manual covers various points in general terms. Some states will apply one principle and another state another. It is up to the investigator to learn and understand which principles apply.> UNDERSTANDING NEGLIGENCE: Negligenceis the failure to exercise that degree of which the law requires to protect others from unreasonable risk or harm. It willmeasure a person's act or omission against that of "a
reasonably prudent man". This measurement is against an unreal person who is used as a standard of conduct. It denotes the failure to act as a reasonably prudent man would have acted under similar circum stances.> DEGREE OF CARE: All that needs to be proven is that the defendant did not act as a reasonable prudent personwould under like circum stances. The law of our land has imposed certain degrees of care that become issues under certain conditions. Some of these circumstances can come out in the actualinvestigation of the facts.> ABSOLUTE LIABILITY: Under some conditions, no neg gence need be shown because the defendant was involved in activity that imposes strict or absolute liability upon him. Under conditions which are dangerous innature strict liability is generally imposed. To apply strict liability, one needs to consider the activity the defendant isinvolved in. The strict liability principle can be compared to the accidental shooting in an
armed robbery. Under such a condition, the criminal can be charged with murder and the mere fact that the shooting was an accident is immaterial. Under certain conditions, you can see absolute liability can be imposed even in the absence of neg gence.> In most cases, anyone whopossesses, stores, maintains, or transports a dangerous instrumentality is absolutely or strictly liable for any injury or damage caused by the instrumentality, regardless of the presence or absence ofdue care.> CONTRIBUTORY OR COMPARATIVE NEGLIGENCE: see above> LAST CLEAR CHANCE: In this principle you might show that the plaintiff had the last clear chance to avoid the accident. In such a case, the defendant'sliability could be diminished or omitted all together.> ASSUMPTION OF RISK: Under certain conditions it could beheld that the plaintiff assumed the risk involved. In such a case, there would be no liability. What this principle means is that, in advance, the plaintiff gave
his consent to assume certain risks. What this really does is transfer certain duties from the defendant to the plaintiff. In other words, the plaintiff is then responsible for himself. A good example of this would beowners of certain sinkholes in Florida used by scuba divers. The divers are almost always required to sign a statement that they are assuming all risks before they dive. However, the as tion of risks does not haveto be in writing and can be implied.> PROXIMATE CAUSE: This has to do with the relationship between the failed duty of the defendant and the damage suffered by the plaintiff. There are thousands of cases each year where theplaintiff claims damages that were not the result of the actions or accident. In such a case, the defendant needs to show thatcertain of the plaintiff's damages were not the proximate cause of the accident.> STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS: This has to do with the time limitation imposed upon the plaintiff to seek damages
from the defendant. It often can become an issue in any negligence case. Dates and times are important. You will want to know the time limitations in yourarea.> UNDERSTANDING THE LAST CLEAR CHANCE DOCTRINE> The law imposes a duty of "last clear chance" or requires each and every party to use due care for the safety of themselves and others. This is related tocomparative and contributory neg gence. Under this doctrine, any party will have a legal duty to avoid an accident and failure to do so will create a liability. Such a doctrine is set up to avoid a situation where (for example) a personsaw the opportunity for an accident to take place and he or she let it happen so damages could be collected.>UNDERSTANDING THE DOCTRINE OF RES IPSA LO QUTUR> Negligence can be proven with circumstantial evidence and one type is res ipsa loquitur. This is a latin term which means, "the thing (act) speaks for itself. There must be four elements present to prove or show
negligence with this doctrine. They are:> > a) Theaccident could not have ordinarily occurred without someone being negligent.> b) The accident is caused by an instrumentality within the exclusive control of the defendant.> c) The injured party (plaintiff) did notcontribute to the negligence.d) The evidence as to the explanation of the accident is more available to the defendant than to the plaintiff.> --> Dr. Sheila JocelynShawCase Type: Paternity DOR Date Filed: 08/29/2005 Location: Div 42 Judicial Officer: Evans, Robert MUniform Case Number: 482005DR014270A001OXRelated Case Information RelatedCases 2002-DR-006249-O (Paternity) Party InformationLead Attorneys Petitioner SHAW, SHEILA JOCELYN BARBARA FANCHER(LIMITED) JONES, EsquireRetained407-849-1133(W)Respondent GONZALEZ, CARLOS ALBERTOEvents & Orders of the Court DISPOSITIONS 05/15/2012Order Denying(Judicial Officer: Evans, Robert M)Comment (Petitioner's Motion/Writ of Habeas Corpus
Contesting Custody Order)09/19/2011Report/Recommendation/Hearing & Order (Judicial Officer: Evans, Robert M)Comment (Denying Petitioner's Writ of Habeas Corpus/Contempt of Court Order)03/30/2011Report/Recommendation/Hearing & Order (Judicial Officer: Evans, Robert M)Comment (Final Order on Motion to Set Arrears)02/17/2011FinalOrder (Judicial Officer: Evans, Robert M)Comment (on motion withdrawal of motion to set reserved arrears)10/22/2010Report/Recommendation and Final Judgment (Judicial Officer: Roche,Renee A)Comment (Petition for Support)05/09/2006Final JudgmentOTHER EVENTS AND HEARINGS 08/07/2012 LettertoJudge Evans (Faxed) w/attached Re: Child Support05/07/2012 Civil Cover Sheet 05/07/2012 Motionfor writ of Habeas Corpus contesting custody order/Modification ofvisitation w/att (Re-Closed 5/15/12)05/07/2012 Birth Certificateas to Male Child04/02/2012 Motionfor writ habeas corpus contesting custodu order w/att (Re-Closed 5/15/12)04/02/2012 Notice
of Change of Address12/05/2011 LetterAmended Letter/Writ of Habeas Corpus to Hearing Officer/Court11/14/2011 Notice of Change of Address09/14/2011 Writ of Habeas Corpuscontempt of court order w/att (Re-Closed 09/19/11) 09/12/2011 Writof Habeas Corpuscontempt of court order w/att (Re-Closed 09/19/11) 09/12/2011 Writ of Habeas Corpuscontempt of court order w/att (Re-Closed 09/19/11) 04/06/2011 ReturnedMail03/28/2011 Motion (8:00 AM) (Judicial Officer Winslow, George) Result: Report and Recommendation 03/28/2011 Court Minutes 03/28/2011 Supplemental Financial Statement03/28/2011 Notice to DepositoryRequest for Multiple Adjustments to Collections 03/28/2011 Certified Notice ofDelinquent Support 03/28/2011 Child Support Information Sheet03/22/2011 Returned Mail03/11/2011 Motion Set Arrears/Repaymentand Notice of Hearing on 3/28/11 @ 8am in Rm 540 (Re-Closed 03/30/11)02/24/2011 Copy/Copiesof Child Support and Federal Law 02/24/2011 Memorandumfrom
Office of the Attorney General Re: Prosecutive Guidelines & Procedures for Child Support Recovery Act of 1992 02/24/2011 Notice of Change of Address02/23/2011Answer02/18/2011 Alias Summons Returned Served7/28/1002/14/2011 Motion (8:00 AM) (Judicial Officer Winslow, George) Result: No Action 01/14/2011 ReturnedMail01/04/2011 Motion Set Arrears/RepaymentReserved (reclosed 2/17/11)01/04/2011 Notice of Hearing2/14/11 @ 8am 11/29/2010Notice of Change of Address10/22/2010 Order for Income Deduction 10/19/2010 Petition/Motion (1:00 PM) (Magistrate Winslow, George) Parties Present Result:Report and Recommendation 10/19/2010 Child Support Information Sheet10/19/2010 Child Support Information Sheet10/19/2010 Exhibit(s)Pet #2 (Support Guidelines Worksheet) 10/19/2010 Exhibit(s)Pet #1 (Supplemental Financial Statement) 10/19/2010 Court Minutes 10/08/2010 Returned Mail09/20/2010 Order for Non Jury Trial10/19/10 @ 1pmRm.540 09/17/2010 Notice for
TrialNon-Jury08/12/2010 Responsewith Regards to Summons ReceivedRegarding Child Support06/14/2010 Alias Summons Issued04/09/2010 Summons Returned Unserved12/17/2009 Request for Admissions(supplemental support)to12/17/2009 Petitionsupplemental for support & other relief (Re-Closed 10/22/10)12/17/2009 Financial Affidavit12/17/2009Certificate of Compliance12/17/2009 Summons Issuedre: supplemental petition for support11/01/2006 Notice of Change of AddressNotice of Change ofAddress|NOTICE CHANGE OF ADDRESS09/28/2006 HRS673 to BureauHRS673 to Bureau|HRS673 TO BUREAULetter|LETTER FILED FROM JUDICIAL ASSISTANT 07/19/2006 LetterLetter|LETTER FILED TO JUDGE RE: CHILD SUPPORT05/09/2006 Final JudgmentFinal Judgment|FINAL JUDGMENT PATERNITY RECORDED 05/09/2006 Disposed by Non-Jury TrialDisposed by Non-Jury Trial|DISPOSED BY NON JURY TRIAL 05/09/2006 Order for Income DeductionOrder for Income Deduction|ORDER FOR INCOME DEDUCTION 05/08/2006 HRS673 to BureauHRS673
to Bureau|HRS673 TO BUREAU 04/28/2006 Court MinutesCourt Minutes|MINUTES HEARING 04/28/2006AffidavitAffidavit|STATE CASE REGISTRY INFORMATION04/28/2006 AffidavitAffidavit|FINANCIAL STATEMENT04/28/2006 Status Hearing (8:00 AM) (JudicialOfficers Deactivated, Deactivated, Deactivated, Deactivated, Deactivated, Deactivated, Roche, Renee A) 04/28/2006 Non-Jury Trial (8:00 AM) (JudicialOfficers Deactivated, Deactivated, Deactivated, Deactivated, Deactivated, Deactivated, Roche, Renee A) 03/29/2006 Request to ProduceRequest to Produce|REQUEST TO PRODUCE TO03/29/2006 Notice for TrialNotice for Trial|NOTICE FOR NON JURY TRIAL03/29/2006 Notice of HearingNotice of Hearing|NOTICE OF HEARING * 04/28/2006 08:00 A.M. 03/29/2006 Order for Non Jury TrialOrder for Non Jury Trial|ORDER FOR NON JURY TRIAL [04/28/2006] 08:00 A.M. 03/28/2006 Notice of Filing HLATissue TypingNotice of Filing HLA Tissue Typing|NOTICE FILING HLA TISSUE TYPING03/28/2006 Request for
AdmissionsRequest forAdmissions |REQUEST FOR ADMISSIONS TO02/09/2006 NoticeNotice|NTS OF PARENTAGE TESTING APPOINTMENT 03/01/06 @ 1:20 P.M.01/10/2006 HRS673 to BureauHRS673to Bureau|HRS673 TO BUREAU 01/05/2006 Child Support Information SheetChild Support Information Sheet|CHILD SUPPORT INFORMATION SHEET 01/05/2006 Child Support Information SheetChild Support Information Sheet|CHILD SUPPORT INFORMATION SHEET01/05/2006 Financial AffidavitFinancial Affidavit|SUPPLEMENTAL FINANCIAL STATEMENT01/05/2006 Court MinutesCourt Minutes|MINUTES HEARING 01/05/2006 Non-Jury Trial (9:00 AM) (Judicial Officers Roche, Renee A, Deactivated, Deactivated, Deactivated, Deactivated, Deactivated, Deactivated) 01/05/2006 Status Hearing (9:00 AM) (Judicial Officers Roche, Renee A, Deactivated, Deactivated,Deactivated, Deactivated, Deactivated, Deactivated) 12/06/2005 Notice for TrialNotice for Trial|NOTICE FOR NON JURYTRIAL12/06/2005 Request to ProduceRequest to
Produce|REQUEST TO PRODUCE TO12/06/2005 Order for Non Jury TrialOrder for Non Jury Trial|ORDER FOR NON JURY TRIAL[01/05/2006] 09:00 A.M. 12/06/2005 Notice of HearingNotice of Hearing|NOTICE OF HEARING * 01/05/2006 09:00 A.M. 12/05/2005AnswerAnswer|ANSWER10/31/2005 Summons ReturnedSummons Returned|SUMMONS SERVED [10/10/2005]10/31/2005 Summons ReturnedSummons Returned|SUMMONS SERVED [10/10/2005]10/27/2005 Answer Denying AllegationsAnswer Denying Allegations|ANSWER DENYING ALLEGATIONS08/29/2005 Initial Judge AssignedInitial Judge Assigned|INITIAL JUDGE ASSIGNED EVANS, ROBERT M 42 08/29/2005 PetitionPetition|PETITION - DOR 08/29/2005 Civil Cover SheetCivil Cover Sheet|CIVIL COVER SHEET FILED 08/29/2005Notice of Social SecurityNotice of Social Security|NOTICE OF SOCIAL SECURITY08/29/2005 FinancialAffidavitFinancial Affidavit|FINANCIAL AFFIDAVIT08/29/2005 Certificate of ComplianceCertificate of Compliance|CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE08/29/2005 Request
forAdmissionsRequest for Admissions |REQUEST FOR ADMISSIONS TO08/29/2005 Summons IssuedSummons Issued|SUMMONS ISSUEDFinancialInformationPetitioner SHAW, SHEILA JOCELYN Total Financial Assessment 50.00 Total Payments and Credits 0.00 Balance Due as of 11/14/2012 50.0009Register of ActionsCase No. 2010-DR-000170-OSHAW, SHEILA JOCELYN KARENA vs. WILLIAMS, JARRID DESHAUN §§§§§§§Case Type: Child Support DOR Date Filed: 01/06/2010 Location: Div 42 Judicial Officer: Evans, Robert M Uniform Case Number: 482010DR000170A001OXRelated Case Information Related Cases 2011-DR-006367-O (ChildSupport) Party Information Lead Attorneys Petitioner SHAW, SHEILA JOCELYN KARENA ANA ELENA(LIMITED) TANGELRODRIGUEZ, EsquireRetained407-849-1133(W)Respondent WILLIAMS, JARRID DESHAUNEvents & Orders of the Court DISPOSITIONS 03/24/2011Report/Recommendation/Hearing & Order (Judicial Officer: Evans, Robert M)Comment (Final Order on Motion to
SetArrears)01/12/2011Final Order (Judicial Officer: Evans, Robert M)Comment (on Withdrawal of Motion to Set Reserved Arrears)04/06/2010Final Judgment (Judicial Officer: Roche, Renee A)Comment (for Support Recorded)OTHER EVENTS AND HEARINGS 08/02/2012 Answerw/att (Unsigned)05/07/2012 MotionFOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS05/07/2012 Birth Certificateas to Female Child04/23/2012 Summons Returned Unserved04/12/2012 Summons Issued04/11/2012 Request for Admissions(Support)04/11/2012 Petition/Motion forModification04/11/2012 Civil Cover Sheet 04/02/2012 Motionfor writ of habeas corpus constestingcustody order w/att04/02/2012 Notice of Change of Address11/14/2011 Notice of Change of Address03/21/2011 Motion (1:30 PM) (Judicial OfficerWinslow, George) Result: Report and Recommendation 03/21/2011 Court Minutes 03/15/2011 Returned Mail03/02/2011 Motion SetArrears/Repaymentand Notice of Hearing on 3/21/11 @ 1:30pm in Rm 540 (Re-Closed 03/24/11)03/01/2011 Civil Cover
Sheet 01/10/2011 Motion (8:00 AM) (Judicial Officer Winslow, George) Result: No Action 12/02/2010 Notice of Hearingon 1/10/11 @ 8am 12/01/2010 Motion Set Arrears/RepaymentReserved (Re-Closed 01/12/11)12/01/2010 Civil Cover Sheet 11/29/2010 Notice of Change of Address04/06/2010 Order for Income Deduction 03/31/2010 Petition/Motion (8:00 AM) () Parties Present Result: Report and Recommendation 03/31/2010Supplemental Financial Statement03/31/2010 Support Guidelines Worksheet 03/31/2010 ChildSupport Information Sheet03/31/2010 Child Support Information Sheet03/31/2010 Court Minutes 02/12/2010 Order for Non Jury Trial3/31/10 @ 8amRm.54002/12/2010 Order for Non Jury Trial3/31/10 @ 8am Rm.540 02/10/2010 Notice for TrialNon Jury02/04/2010Summons Returned Served1/16/1001/28/2010 Answerw/att01/06/2010 Summons Issued01/06/2010 Civil Cover Sheet 01/06/2010 PetitionFOR SUPPORT AND OTHER RELIEF01/06/2010 Request for Admissions01/06/2010 Financial
Affidavit01/06/2010 Certificate of ComplianceFinancial InformationRespondent WILLIAMS, JARRID DESHAUN Total Financial Assessment 15.00 Total Payments and Credits 15.00 Balance Due as of 11/14/2012 0.0005/20/2010 Transaction Assessment 15.00 05/20/2010 Counter Payment Receipt # DR-2010-15610 WILLIAMS, JARRIDDESHAUN (15.00)Duty to report misconduct The duty to report misconduct is oneof the ethical duties imposed on attorneys in the United States by the rules governing professional responsibility. With certain exceptions, an attorney whobecomes aware that either a fellow attorney or a judge has committed an act in violation of the rules of e... ---------- Forwarded message ----------From: Sheila ShawDate: Monday, August 20, 2012Subject: Fwd: MISUSE OF OFFICE (Williams register of actions)-Fwd: 666.US Code violations complaint cont.civil rights violations/colr of law/racial profili/misuse of officeFwd: REGARDING CASE NUMBER 05-DR-1470-O, CHANGE IN
CASE NUMBER FROM 2002-DR-006249-OFwdTo: Ombudsman@dos.state.fl.us Register ofActionsCase No. 2010-DR-000170-OSHAW, SHEILAJOCELYN KARENA vs. WILLIAMS, JARRID DESHAUN §§§§§§§Case Type: Child Support DORDate Filed: 01/06/2010Location: Div 42Judicial Officer: Evans, Robert MUniform Case Number: 482010DR000170A001OXRelated Case InformationRelated Cases2011-DR-006367-O (Child Support)Party InformationLead AttorneysPetitionerSHAW, SHEILA JOCELYN KARENAANA ELENA (LIMITED) TANGELRODRIGUEZ, EsquireRetained407-849-1133(W)RespondentWILLIAMS, JARRID DESHAUNEvents & Orders of the Court DISPOSITIONS03/24/2011 Report/Recommendation/Hearing & Order (Judicial Officer: Evans, Robert M)Comment (Final Order on Motion to SetArrears)01/12/2011

----- Forwarded Message -----From: Sheila Shaw <nine09digits@yahoo.com>To: "secretary@parentalequality.ie" <...

--
Dr. Sheila Jocelyn Shaw

| |
| | | | | | | |
| Social Security Act Title IVSocial Security delivers a broad range of services online at socialsecurity.gov. We have a proud history of protecting the integrity of our programs and service to ... |
| |
| View on www.socialsecurity.gov | Preview by Yahoo |
| |
| |

On Tuesday, December 9, 2014 1:44 PM, Sheila Shaw <nine09digits@yahoo.com> wrote:

On Tuesday, December 9, 2014 1:33 PM, Sheila Shaw <nine09digits@yahoo.com> wrote:

Section 1001 of Title 18 of the United States Code, a statute that criminalizes false statements made directly or indirectly to the Federal government. Rather than enforce not only the children's right to enforcement of the law, fraud on the courts and dismiss the CPI's claims, DCF further committed acts of ethnic biasness and economic crimes by haulting the current support order and judgment issued by Div 42 on December 22, 2011, an order for recovery of child support against Carlos Alberto Gonzalez, a case that had been open since 2002 and kept be reserved for collection activity, as disclosed on the register of actions, Orange County, Florida. The child support collection activities were abated as of February 4th, 2011 right after the false statements of missing children and kidnapping were presented to law enforcement channels, which were never discussed by GAL, guardian at litem, DCF or the attorneys in Div 7 Juvenile court proceedings against
the mother, myself, extending from the initial case dismissal on January 28th, 2011, again on February 4th, 2011 continuing to August 30th of 2011 during which time without a threshold of demonstrative showing of financial support or any other emotional or family support proven to the court. In essence the matters of fraud on the court, the initial claim to return to court was not even discussed and the period between February to August was a witch hunt, a period that DCF used to fabricate a reason or justify removing the children after investigating the mother's academic background which was waived around in the courts to present a monetary basis to award a later child support order against the mother after closing collection activities against the dads who were in court for criminal nonsupport between December of 2010, January of 2011, February and March of 2011 all recorded in the Clerk of Orange County's Record's Management Division in Room 150 of
the Orange County Courthouse.
Attorney Deceit
Attorney Misconduct
Fraud on the Court
3 of several Civil Rights Violations
outside of the harassment that had been going on against the eldest sibling and the mother.---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Info Defence for Children <info@defenceforchildren.nl>
Date: Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 3:04 AM
Subject: RE: HAS THIS INCIDENT BEEN REPORTED TO THE INSPECTOR GENERAL REGARDING FRAUD, MISUSE OF OFFICE AND FALSE STATEMENTS Fwd: CPS may only place founded reports on the state's central registry of child abuse and neglect
To: Sheila Shaw <sdynastysheila@gmail.com> Dear Sheila, We do not know to whom you are addressing your messages. Could you inform us for whom you are adressing your information? If not, please remove our email address from your mailing list. Kind regards,Ingrid van Velzen Van: Sheila Shaw [mailto:sdynastysheila@gmail.com]
Verzonden: maandag 21 juli 2014 17:05
Aan: staff@ncjfcj.org; contactus@ncjfcj.org; crimestoppers@state.de.us; crime stoppers; crime stoppers; Florida Commission; Florida Commission; Judicial Committee; buchner@nacole.org; police misconduct; vhampton@firstateloan.org; dlewis@bbif.com;oreid@bbif.com; jmotoney82@hotmail.com; bigdanfla@aol.com; cei2234@aol.com; eljojn@aol.com; workcap@bellsouth.net;icce@hccfl.edu; rblass@cob.fsu.edu; jsnyder@rollins.edu; oneal@ucf.edu; judithj@miami.edu; wandrews@stetson.edu; dlday@ufl.edu;jmuir@ufl.edu; wplant@poly.usf.edu; landerson@bdb.org; ksmallridge@bdb.org; pauledf@bellsouth.net;jmcgill@edcsarasotacounty.com; llaubscher@eflorida.com; mmyhre@uuf.edu; umcmillen@gcvca.org; admin@gcvca.org;admin@gcvf.com; jane.teague@florida-instituete.com; elena@miamifinaceforum.com; weitlaufd@thinnovates.com;kjain@tampabay.rr.com; Alpesh@eSANGHE.com; kforster@pinellascounty.org; mheesen@nvca.org; bzophin@cbh.com;jrybicki@cliftonlarsonallen.com; scott.mager@gt.com;
lee.bell@saltmarshcpa.com; scastino@vestal-wiler.com; daronson@bergersingerman.com; jigoe@edwardswildman.com;svazquez@foley.com; cparadies@fowlerwhite.com; mssott@duanemorris.com; milton.vescovacci@gray-robinson.com;beau.baker@hklaw.com; ivan.colao@hklaw.com; peter.reinert@lowndes-law.com; ntcastellano@trenam.com;kimberly.bruce@baml.com; avsprocess@verizon.net; jimm11yy@gmail.com; ericende@yahoo.com; GColbert@npcfo.com;pmeath@sauare1bank.com; dkirkland@svb.com; RBarron@bergersingerman.com; info@nair-co.com; info@newworldangels.com;geraldo@n-jcenter.com; rdenmon@carltonfields.com; Womens Advocacy; Women United; Stephanie Doty;helpline@womensaid.org.uk; police misconduct; nlchp@nlchp.org; mailbox@preventchildabuse.org; Coalition <stop@pcar.org>, Pennsylvania Liberties <info@aclupa.org>, Pennsylvania Environmental <ra-epaskdep@state.pa.us>, tampa.division@ic.fbi.gov, domestic coalition <llevine@jwi.org>, agreenberg@jwi.org, info@courtclasses.com,
arcarot@nsu.law.nova.edu, williams@ouhsc.edu, acs@pcadv.org, rturckes@fletc.treas.gov, admin@ncjfcj.unr.edu,fnatalie@wfstone.com, info@nationalcenterdvtraumamh.org, mmclauglin@nnedv.org, rtolman@umich.edu, jedleson@umn.edu,publicpolicy@ncadv.org, info <info@veilofinnocence.org>,; child protection; mobile fitness; mobile fitness; military; child; Child Support; child abuse; military child; military; Development@childrensrights.org rights; Coalition <stop@pcar.org>, Pennsylvania Liberties <info@aclupa.org>, Pennsylvania Environmental <ra-epaskdep@state.pa.us>, tampa.division@ic.fbi.gov, domestic coalition <llevine@jwi.org>, agreenberg@jwi.org, info@courtclasses.com, arcarot@nsu.law.nova.edu, williams@ouhsc.edu, acs@pcadv.org,rturckes@fletc.treas.gov, admin@ncjfcj.unr.edu, fnatalie@wfstone.com, info@nationalcenterdvtraumamh.org, mmclauglin@nnedv.org,rtolman@umich.edu, jedleson@umn.edu, publicpolicy@ncadv.org, info <info@veilofinnocence.org>,; military;
child; child; Christina McGhee; Chris Wilson; finance; ACES; Alicia; military; military child; Info Defence for Children; info@nyof.org child; military child; Howard; child support; wbrown@childrenrights.org; child protective; info@calfarley.org child; military;info@preventchildabusec.org; military; military child; info@stopchildpredators.org; child abuse; hope@hopechildrenshome.org child;sandy.franklin@militarychild.org; military; child abuse; Orange; military child; child; Judy.Glennon@militarychild.org; Alicia Day; child; child; Childrens Inspector; child; military; michelle@childwelfare.net; PASSPORT INFO; military child; child; fcf@floridaschildrenfirst.orgrights; Enforcement; military child; CHILD SUPPORT; military; pennsylvania health, Abuse<ncea@nasua.org>, ACE <acepresident@acecashexpress.com>,, ACE <acepresident@acecashexpress.com>, ACES, <aces@childsupport-aces.org>, ACESGROUP, <aceschildsupportenews-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com>, ACLU,
<aclufl@aclufl.org><paffairs@oig.hhs.gov>, Environmental Justice,
Onderwerp: Fwd: HAS THIS INCIDENT BEEN REPORTED TO THE INSPECTOR GENERAL REGARDING FRAUD, MISUSE OF OFFICE AND FALSE STATEMENTS Fwd: CPS may only place founded reports on the state's central registry of child abuse and neglect

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Sheila Shaw <sdynastysheila@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 12:04 PM
Subject: HAS THIS INCIDENT BEEN REPORTED TO THE INSPECTOR GENERAL REGARDING FRAUD, MISUSE OF OFFICE AND FALSE STATEMENTS Fwd: CPS may only place founded reports on the state's central registry of child abuse and neglect
To: Maxine_McGregor@dcf.state.fl.us, Karlene_Cole-Palmer@dcf.state.fl.us, Childrens Inspector <ig_complaints@dcf.state.fl.us>,oighotline@gao.gov, HHSTips@oig.hhs.gov, "pennsylvania health, Abuse<ncea@nasua.org>, ACE <acepresident@acecashexpress.com>,, ACE <acepresident@acecashexpress.com>, ACES, <aces@childsupport-aces.org>, ACESGROUP, <aceschildsupportenews-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com>, ACLU, <aclufl@aclufl.org><paffairs@oig.hhs.gov>, Environmental Justice, <environmental-justice@epa.gov>, Ethics <contactOGE@oge.gov>,, Ethics <ethics@indiana.edu>, family violence, <fvdinfo@ncjfcj.org>, Federal Victims" <victimsrights@ic.fbi.gov>, Florida Fraud <russfernandes@fdle.state.fl.us>, Orlando <fraud@orl-oha.org>, ffetf@usdoj.gov HAS THIS INCIDENT BEEN REPORTED TO THE INSPECTOR GENERAL REGARDING FRAUD, MISUSE OF OFFICE AND FALSE STATEMENTS Fwd: CPS may only place founded reports on the state's central registry of child abuse and neglect

INQUIRY SENT TO:
Maxine_McGregor@dcf.state.fl.us
Karlene_Cole-Palmer@dcf.state.fl.us

http://www.dcf.state.fl.us/admin/publications/policies/180-4.pdf

Karlene Cole-Palmer
CLS Regional Director
Children’s Legal Services
Department of Children and Families
400 West Robinson Street, Suite S1114
Orlando, Florida 32801
Office: (407) 245-0530
E-mail: Karlene_Cole-Palmer@dcf.state.fl.us
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Sheila Shaw <sdynastysheila@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 11:11 AM
Subject: CPS may only place founded reports on the state's central registry of child abuse and neglect
To: Sheila Shaw <sdynastysheila@gmail.com>
1) CPS may only place founded reports on the state's central registry of child abuse and neglect. (In some states, unfounded reports are placed on the central registry, which not only
causes harm to innocent people but is also a violation of due process.) 2) Caseworkers must inform families if a report is anonymous. (There is a difference between anonymous and confidential—reporters’ names should be kept confidential, but anonymous reports are not as reliable as those made by known reporters.) 3) Parents must be allowed to select an unrelated adult to be present during interviews of their children. 4) Investigations must cease immediately upon discovery that the allegations are false. Continuing
the investigation process despite proof of innocence only traumatizes the
family and wastes state resources. 5) Parents must
have access to the records of their investigations. HSLDA also continues to assist with incorporating the following two federal CAPTA
requirements into state codes: 1) Requiring child protective services workers to be trained in their duty to protect the statutory and constitutional rights of those they are
investigating. 2) Requiring child protective services personnel to advise individuals subject to a child abuse and neglect investigation of the complaint or allegation made against them. Notes 1. Children’s Bureau. (2003). Child Maltreatment. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Retrieved fromhttp://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/pubs/cm03/index.htm. 2. Calabretta v. Floyd, 189 F.3d 808 (1999).

2003 FL title XLVI crimes chapter 787
787.03

The act contains 11 titles, or sections, ranging from additional corporate board responsibilities to criminal penalties, and requires the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to implement rulings on requirements to comply with the law. Harvey Pitt, the 26th chairman of the SEC, led the SEC in the adoption of dozens of rules to implement the Sarbanes–Oxley Act. It created a new, quasi-public agency, the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board, or PCAOB, charged with overseeing, regulating, inspecting and disciplining accounting firms in their roles as auditors of public companies
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarbanes%E2%80%93Oxley_Act

http://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/migrated/cpr/mrpc/MRPCSubjectGuide.authcheckdam.pdf

http://www.americanbar.org/groups/professional_responsibility/publications/model_rules_of_professional_conduct/model_rules_of_professional_conduct_table_of_contents.html

Hate Crime Laws:

FL
Fla. Stat. § 877.19
Mandates collection and dissemination by the Governor of data on "incidents of criminal acts that evidence prejudice based on race, religion, ethnicity, color, ancestry, sexual orientation, or national origin." > More information

FL
Fla. Stat. § 806.13
Criminalizes damage to places of worship. Includes penalties for minors. > More information

FL
Fla. Stat. § 775.085
Enhances penalty for crimes evidencing "prejudice based on the race, color, ancestry, ethnicity, religion, sexual orientation, national origin, mental or physical disability, or advanced age of the victim." > More information

FL
Fla. Stat. § 775.0845
Enhances penalty for crimes committed by offenders wearing hood or mask.

REGARDING FALSE KIDNAPPING & MISSING CHILDREN REPORT Fw: POLICE/PROFECESSIONAL MISCONDUCT BY INTENTIONAL OMISSIONS OF THE DAD'S DRUG MANUFACTURING AND DISTRIBUTION/MENTAL HEALTH CRIMINAL HISTORIES RESULTING IN MATERNAL INJURIES AND ABUSE TOWARDS THE CHILD AND NATURAL PARENT- , JUDICIAL HEARING OFFICE TO ASSIST AND EVADE CRIMINAL CHARGES AGAINST THE OBLIGOR/ ASSISTING CRIMINAL ACTIVITY BY THE OBLIGOR INCLUDING NEGLECT, NEGLIGENCE, CHILD ABUSE FAMILY DOMESTIC VIOLENCE Fw: HATE CRIMES THRU POLICE & PROFESSIONAL MISUSE OF OFFICE TO ASSIST CRIMINAL ACTIVITY AND RACIAL PROFILING, Fw: is res ipsa loquitur- negligence- racial profiling comlaint

CPI 5617503201, FELICIA HANDLEY, ORANGE COUNTY DIVISION OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILIES,

Office of Civil Rights
1317 Winewood Blvd., Bldg 1, Room 110
Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0700

Phone (850) 487-1901
Fax (850) 921-8470

http://www.myflfamilies.com/about-us/childrens-legal-services/regional-contacts
EMERGENCY RESPONSE FALSE COMPLAINT SUBMITTED TO LAW ENFORCEMENT REGARDING CHILD CUSTODY

attorney general complaints:
ATTORNEY GENERAL COMPLAINT FILED AGAINST Hershkowitz Russell S Attorney Category: Bankruptcy Law [Edit] 1110 Douglas Ave Altamonte Springs, FL 32714 (407) 786-2889 http://www.russellhlaw.com

409.2563 Administrative establishment of child support obligations.—
(1) DEFINITIONS.—As used in this section, the term:
(a) “Administrative support order” means a final order rendered by or on behalf of the department pursuant to this section establishing or modifying the obligation of a parent to contribute to the support and maintenance of his or her child or children, which may include provisions for monetary support, retroactive support, health care, and other elements of support pursuant to chapter 61.
(b) “Caregiver” means a person, other than the mother, father, or putative father, who has physical custody of the child or with whom the child primarily resides.
(c) “Filed” means a document has been received and accepted for filing at the offices of the department by the clerk or any authorized deputy clerk of the department. The date of filing must be indicated on the face of the document by the clerk or deputy clerk.
(d) “Financial affidavit” means an affidavit or written declaration as provided by s. 92.525(2) which shows an individual’s income, allowable deductions, net income, and other information needed to calculate the child support guideline amount under s. 61.30.
(e) “Rendered” means that a signed written order is filed with the clerk or any deputy clerk of the department and served on the respondent. The date of filing must be indicated on the face of the order at the time of rendition.
(f) “Title IV-D case” means a case or proceeding in which the department is providing child support services within the scope of Title IV-D of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. ss. 651 et seq.
(g) “Retroactive support” means a child support obligation established pursuant to s. 61.30(17).
Other terms used in this section have the meanings ascribed in ss. 61.046 and 409.2554.
(2) PURPOSE AND SCOPE.—
(a) It is not the Legislature’s intent to limit the jurisdiction of the circuit courts to hear and determine issues regarding child support. This section is intended to provide the department with an alternative procedure for establishing child support obligations in Title IV-D cases in a fair and expeditious manner when there is no court order of support. The procedures in this section are effective throughout the state and shall be implemented statewide.
(b) The administrative procedure set forth in this section concerns only the establishment of child support obligations. This section does not grant jurisdiction to the department or the Division of Administrative Hearings to hear or determine issues of dissolution of marriage, separation, alimony or spousal support, termination of parental rights, dependency, disputed paternity, except for a determination of paternity as provided in s. 409.256, or award of or change of time-sharing. This paragraph notwithstanding, the department and the Division of Administrative Hearings may make findings of fact that are necessary for a proper determination of a parent’s support obligation as authorized by this section.
(c) If there is no support order for a child in a Title IV-D case whose paternity has been established or is presumed by law, or whose paternity is the subject of a proceeding under s. 409.256, the department may establish a parent’s child support obligation pursuant to this section, s. 61.30, and other relevant provisions of state law. The parent’s obligation determined by the department may include any obligation to pay retroactive support and any obligation to provide for health care for a child, whether through insurance coverage, reimbursement of expenses, or both. The department may proceed on behalf of:
1. An applicant or recipient of public assistance, as provided by ss. 409.2561 and 409.2567;
2. A former recipient of public assistance, as provided by s. 409.2569;
3. An individual who has applied for services as provided by s. 409.2567;
4. Itself or the child, as provided by s. 409.2561; or
5. A state or local government of another state, as provided by chapter 88.
(d) Either parent, or a caregiver if applicable, may at any time file a civil action in a circuit court having jurisdiction and proper venue to determine parental support obligations, if any. A support order issued by a circuit court prospectively supersedes an administrative support order rendered by the department.
(e) Pursuant to paragraph (b), neither the department nor the Division of Administrative Hearings has jurisdiction to award or change child custody or rights of parental contact. Either parent may at any time file a civil action in a circuit having jurisdiction and proper venue for a determination of child custody and rights of parental contact.
(f) The department shall terminate the administrative proceeding and file an action in circuit court to determine support if within 20 days after receipt of the initial notice the parent from whom support is being sought requests in writing that the department proceed in circuit court or states in writing his or her intention to address issues concerning time-sharing or rights to parental contact in court and if within 10 days after receipt of the department’s petition and waiver of service the parent from whom support is being sought signs and returns the waiver of service form to the department.
(g) The notices and orders issued by the department under this section shall be written clearly and plainly.
(3) JURISDICTION OVER NONRESIDENTS.—The department may use the procedures authorized by this section to establish a child support obligation against a nonresident over whom the state may assert personal jurisdiction under chapter 48 or chapter 88.
(4) NOTICE OF PROCEEDING TO ESTABLISH ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPORT ORDER.—To commence a proceeding under this section, the department shall provide to the parent from whom support is not being sought and serve the parent from whom support is being sought with a notice of proceeding to establish administrative support order and a blank financial affidavit form. The notice must state:
(a) The names of both parents, the name of the caregiver, if any, and the name and date of birth of the child or children;
(b) That the department intends to establish an administrative support order as defined in this section;
(c) That both parents must submit a completed financial affidavit to the department within 20 days after receiving the notice, as provided by paragraph (13)(a);
(d) That both parents, or parent and caregiver if applicable, are required to furnish to the department information regarding their identities and locations, as provided by paragraph (13)(b);
(e) That both parents, or parent and caregiver if applicable, are required to promptly notify the department of any change in their mailing addresses to ensure receipt of all subsequent pleadings, notices, and orders, as provided by paragraph (13)(c);
(f) That the department will calculate support obligations based on the child support guidelines schedule in s. 61.30 and using all available information, as provided by paragraph (5)(a), and will incorporate such obligations into a proposed administrative support order;
(g) That the department will send by regular mail to both parents, or parent and caregiver if applicable, a copy of the proposed administrative support order, the department’s child support worksheet, and any financial affidavits submitted by a parent or prepared by the department;
(h) That the parent from whom support is being sought may file a request for a hearing in writing within 20 days after the date of mailing or other service of the proposed administrative support order or will be deemed to have waived the right to request a hearing;
(i) That if the parent from whom support is being sought does not file a timely request for hearing after service of the proposed administrative support order, the department will issue an administrative support order that incorporates the findings of the proposed administrative support order, and will send by regular mail a copy of the administrative support order to both parents, or parent and caregiver if applicable;
(j) That after an administrative support order is rendered, the department will file a copy of the order with the clerk of the circuit court;
(k) That after an administrative support order is rendered, the department may enforce the administrative support order by any lawful means;
(l) That either parent, or caregiver if applicable, may file at any time a civil action in a circuit court having jurisdiction and proper venue to determine parental support obligations, if any, and that a support order issued by a circuit court supersedes an administrative support order rendered by the department;
(m) That neither the department nor the Division of Administrative Hearings has jurisdiction to award or change child custody or rights of parental contact or time-sharing, and these issues may be addressed only in circuit court.
1. The parent from whom support is being sought may request in writing that the department proceed in circuit court to determine his or her support obligations.
2. The parent from whom support is being sought may state in writing to the department his or her intention to address issues concerning custody or rights to parental contact in circuit court.
3. If the parent from whom support is being sought submits the request authorized in subparagraph 1., or the statement authorized in subparagraph 2. to the department within 20 days after the receipt of the initial notice, the department shall file a petition in circuit court for the determination of the parent’s child support obligations, and shall send to the parent from whom support is being sought a copy of its petition, a notice of commencement of action, and a request for waiver of service of process as provided in the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure.
4. If, within 10 days after receipt of the department’s petition and waiver of service, the parent from whom support is being sought signs and returns the waiver of service form to the department, the department shall terminate the administrative proceeding without prejudice and proceed in circuit court.
5. In any circuit court action filed by the department pursuant to this paragraph or filed by a parent from whom support is being sought or other person pursuant to paragraph (l) or paragraph (n), the department shall be a party only with respect to those issues of support allowed and reimbursable under Title IV-D of the Social Security Act. It is the responsibility of the parent from whom support is being sought or other person to take the necessary steps to present other issues for the court to consider.
(n) That if the parent from whom support is being sought files an action in circuit court and serves the department with a copy of the petition within 20 days after being served notice under this subsection, the administrative process ends without prejudice and the action must proceed in circuit court;
(o) Information provided by the Office of State Courts Administrator concerning the availability and location of self-help programs for those who wish to file an action in circuit court but who cannot afford an attorney.
The department may serve the notice of proceeding to establish administrative support order by certified mail, restricted delivery, return receipt requested. Alternatively, the department may serve the notice by any means permitted for service of process in a civil action. For purposes of this section, an authorized employee of the department may serve the notice and execute an affidavit of service. Service by certified mail is completed when the certified mail is received or refused by the addressee or by an authorized agent as designated by the addressee in writing. If a person other than the addressee signs the return receipt, the department shall attempt to reach the addressee by telephone to confirm whether the notice was received, and the department shall document any telephonic communications. If someone other than the addressee signs the return receipt, the addressee does not respond to the notice, and the department is unable to confirm that the addressee has received the notice, service is not completed and the department shall attempt to have the addressee served personally. The department shall provide the parent from whom support is not being sought or the caregiver with a copy of the notice by regular mail to the last known address of the parent from whom support is not being sought or caregiver.
(5) PROPOSED ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPORT ORDER.—
(a) After serving notice upon a parent in accordance with subsection (4), the department shall calculate that parent’s child support obligation under the child support guidelines schedule as provided by s. 61.30, based on any timely financial affidavits received and other information available to the department. If either parent fails to comply with the requirement to furnish a financial affidavit, the department may proceed on the basis of information available from any source, if such information is sufficiently reliable and detailed to allow calculation of guideline schedule amounts under s.61.30. If a parent receives public assistance and fails to submit a financial affidavit, the department may submit a financial affidavit or written declaration for that parent pursuant to s. 61.30(15). If there is a lack of sufficient reliable information concerning a parent’s actual earnings for a current or past period, it shall be presumed for the purpose of establishing a support obligation that the parent had an earning capacity equal to the federal minimum wage during the applicable period.
(b) The department shall send by regular mail to both parents, or to a parent and caregiver if applicable, copies of the proposed administrative support order, its completed child support worksheet, and any financial affidavits submitted by a parent or prepared by the department. The proposed administrative support order must contain the same elements as required for an administrative support order under paragraph (7)(e).
(c) The department shall provide a notice of rights with the proposed administrative support order, which notice must inform the parent from whom support is being sought that:
1. The parent from whom support is being sought may, within 20 days after the date of mailing or other service of the proposed administrative support order, request a hearing by filing a written request for hearing in a form and manner specified by the department;
2. If the parent from whom support is being sought files a timely request for a hearing, the case shall be transferred to the Division of Administrative Hearings, which shall conduct further proceedings and may enter an administrative support order;
3. A parent from whom support is being sought who fails to file a timely request for a hearing shall be deemed to have waived the right to a hearing, and the department may render an administrative support order pursuant to paragraph (7)(b);
4. The parent from whom support is being sought may consent in writing to entry of an administrative support order without a hearing;
5. The parent from whom support is being sought may, within 10 days after the date of mailing or other service of the proposed administrative support order, contact a department representative, at the address or telephone number specified in the notice, to informally discuss the proposed administrative support order and, if informal discussions are requested timely, the time for requesting a hearing will be extended until 10 days after the department notifies the parent that the informal discussions have been concluded; and
6. If an administrative support order that establishes a parent’s support obligation is rendered, whether after a hearing or without a hearing, the department may enforce the administrative support order by any lawful means.
(d) If, after serving the proposed administrative support order but before a final administrative support order is rendered, the department receives additional information that makes it necessary to amend the proposed administrative support order, it shall prepare an amended proposed administrative support order, with accompanying amended child support worksheets and other material necessary to explain the changes, and follow the same procedures set forth in paragraphs (b) and (c).
(6) HEARING.—If the parent from whom support is being sought files a timely request for hearing or the department determines that an evidentiary hearing is appropriate, the department shall refer the proceeding to the Division of Administrative Hearings. Unless otherwise provided by this section, chapter 120 and the Uniform Rules of Procedure shall govern the conduct of the proceedings. The administrative law judge shall consider all available and admissible information and any presumptions that apply as provided by paragraph (5)(a).

(7) ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPORT ORDER.—
(a) If a hearing is held, the administrative law judge of the Division of Administrative Hearings shall issue an administrative support order, or a final order denying an administrative support order, which constitutes final agency action by the department. The Division of Administrative Hearings shall transmit any such order to the department for filing and rendering.
(b) If the parent from whom support is being sought does not file a timely request for a hearing, the parent will be deemed to have waived the right to request a hearing.
(c) If the parent from whom support is being sought waives the right to a hearing, or consents in writing to the entry of an order without a hearing, the department may render an administrative support order.
(d) The department shall send by regular mail a copy of the administrative support order, or the final order denying an administrative support order, to both parents, or a parent and caregiver if applicable. The parent from whom support is being sought shall be notified of the right to seek judicial review of the administrative support order in accordance with s.120.68.
(e) An administrative support order must comply with ss. 61.13(1) and 61.30. The department shall develop a standard form or forms for administrative support orders. An administrative support order must provide and state findings, if applicable, concerning:
1. The full name and date of birth of the child or children;
2. The name of the parent from whom support is being sought and the other parent or caregiver;
3. The parent’s duty and ability to provide support;
4. The amount of the parent’s monthly support obligation;
5. Any obligation to pay retroactive support;
6. The parent’s obligation to provide for the health care needs of each child, whether through health insurance, contribution toward the cost of health insurance, payment or reimbursement of health care expenses for the child, or any combination thereof;
7. The beginning date of any required monthly payments and health insurance;
8. That all support payments ordered must be paid to the Florida State Disbursement Unit as provided by s.61.1824;
9. That the parents, or caregiver if applicable, must file with the department when the administrative support order is rendered, if they have not already done so, and update as appropriate the information required pursuant to paragraph (13)(b);
10. That both parents, or parent and caregiver if applicable, are required to promptly notify the department of any change in their mailing addresses pursuant to paragraph (13)(c); and
11. That if the parent ordered to pay support receives reemployment assistance or unemployment compensation benefits, the payor shall withhold, and transmit to the department, 40 percent of the benefits for payment of support, not to exceed the amount owed.
An income deduction order as provided by s. 61.1301must be incorporated into the administrative support order or, if not incorporated into the administrative support order, the department or the Division of Administrative Hearings shall render a separate income deduction order.

Thursday, 22 January 2015