The paper work on the newer case
The paper work on the newer case ... in that Officer's hands ... did not match the preexisting paper work ... referred to as research ... to familiarize herself with that case. Provide ... the Evidence ... Law and ... Rule ... Procedure. Rule of Law ... that affords a Agent/ Officer to preform Official Business ... in such High Strangeness. If there be none ... Provide ... Evidence ... Proof and ... Law ... Procedure ... Rule of Law ... that was Violated. Be specific ... in Legal Terms.
The paper work on the newer case ... in that Officer's hands ... did not match the preexisting paper work ... referred to as research ... to familiarize herself with that case. Provide ... the Evidence ... Law and ... Rule ... Procedure. Rule of Law ... that affords a Agent/ Officer to preform Official Business ... in such High Strangeness. If there be none ... Provide ... Evidence ... Proof and ... Law ... Procedure ... Rule of Law ... that was Violated. Be specific ... in Legal Terms.
A past Employer
A past Employer ... had been garnishing double ... the actual Garnishment. Which ... will be covered more thoroughly in ... the Younger/Newer case. Mr. Hileman ... explained that he ... had already addressed the issue in Court. Where ... the Referee asked him ... to provide ... Pay Stubs ... to Prove it. The new Officer had discovered ... it on Record. Again ... it is not Mr. Hileman(s) Burden Of Proof' .... it is the Plaintiff ... Claimant(s) Burden Of Proof. Which ... stood ... on it's merits ... in their own Records . That both cases ... were receiving ... twice as much ... per month ... as the monthly garnishment amount was set ... by Ward County.
In regards to
In regards to the new case ... the monthly ... was raised by Grand Forks. Whether Grand Forks is under Ward County's Regional Jurisdiction ... is still ... Unknown ... due to the Offending Party(s) ... lack of dis closer. Later... in regard to the newer case .... that case was handled by Florida ... who preformed ... no Recorded Call or ... fact checking ... regarding ... Standing. Then ... a new Employer came into the Work Space. That Employer ... continued to garnish double ... the actual Garnishment. Which means ... twice the Legal amount of Clerical fee ... to preform Garnishment. Then yet again ... a new Employer came into the same Work Space.
That Employer ... could see on left over Files ... that the Garnishment ... previously paid out ... was twice the actual Order. The paper work ... that Employer received ... from Ward County ... did not match ... old paper work. That Employer ... then fired Mr. Hileman. Legally ... a Employer can not interfere with ... a Child support case. Provide ... Evidence ... Law ... Procedure and ... Rule under Law ... as to the Violations and ... what disciplinary action has been taken and ... that ... they were properly followed. To include ... the Legal Action ... that was taken ... against the Hotel Restaurant. As well ... Evidence ... Proof ... Law ... Procedure ... Rule of Law ... that firing a Garnished Employee or ... Tax Intercepted Employee ... does not interfere ... with Court Order's or ... a Child support case. Also ... how that applies in this case.
A past Employer ... had been garnishing double ... the actual Garnishment. Which ... will be covered more thoroughly in ... the Younger/Newer case. Mr. Hileman ... explained that he ... had already addressed the issue in Court. Where ... the Referee asked him ... to provide ... Pay Stubs ... to Prove it. The new Officer had discovered ... it on Record. Again ... it is not Mr. Hileman(s) Burden Of Proof' .... it is the Plaintiff ... Claimant(s) Burden Of Proof. Which ... stood ... on it's merits ... in their own Records . That both cases ... were receiving ... twice as much ... per month ... as the monthly garnishment amount was set ... by Ward County.
In regards to
In regards to the new case ... the monthly ... was raised by Grand Forks. Whether Grand Forks is under Ward County's Regional Jurisdiction ... is still ... Unknown ... due to the Offending Party(s) ... lack of dis closer. Later... in regard to the newer case .... that case was handled by Florida ... who preformed ... no Recorded Call or ... fact checking ... regarding ... Standing. Then ... a new Employer came into the Work Space. That Employer ... continued to garnish double ... the actual Garnishment. Which means ... twice the Legal amount of Clerical fee ... to preform Garnishment. Then yet again ... a new Employer came into the same Work Space.
That Employer ... could see on left over Files ... that the Garnishment ... previously paid out ... was twice the actual Order. The paper work ... that Employer received ... from Ward County ... did not match ... old paper work. That Employer ... then fired Mr. Hileman. Legally ... a Employer can not interfere with ... a Child support case. Provide ... Evidence ... Law ... Procedure and ... Rule under Law ... as to the Violations and ... what disciplinary action has been taken and ... that ... they were properly followed. To include ... the Legal Action ... that was taken ... against the Hotel Restaurant. As well ... Evidence ... Proof ... Law ... Procedure ... Rule of Law ... that firing a Garnished Employee or ... Tax Intercepted Employee ... does not interfere ... with Court Order's or ... a Child support case. Also ... how that applies in this case.
The new Officer/Agent ... also vehemently defended ... the original Administrator of Ward County Child support ... first name Fred. Mr. Hileman was not attacking this man. So ... is it standard practice ... to behave in such a manor?
In one attempt at Remedy
Mr. Hileman mentioned ... the mixing of his Social number. That was met with the following rebuttal .... "We do not keep Files by Social numbers". Mr. Hileman ... never claimed Ward County Child support ... used Social numbers to File cases. Rather ... he was referring to the details ... of his Personal Information ... that Ward County Child support ... has in the File. These are not the same thing.
Mr. Hileman mentioned ... the mixing of his Social number. That was met with the following rebuttal .... "We do not keep Files by Social numbers". Mr. Hileman ... never claimed Ward County Child support ... used Social numbers to File cases. Rather ... he was referring to the details ... of his Personal Information ... that Ward County Child support ... has in the File. These are not the same thing.
In a Court appearance
Mr. Hileman brought up ... Best Interest of the Child Law. Once again ... there was a rebuttal ... with attitude .... "We represent ... the best interest of the State". Which Mr. Hileman is one of those We The People. Thus ... a member of the Body Politic. Provide ... Evidence ... Law. .. Procedure ... Rule under Law that ... there is no... Best Interest of The Child Law . If there is ... include ... how it has been applied and ... followed ... in this case and ... both cases. Provide ... Evidence ... Law ... Procedure and ... Rule under Law ... as to the Violations and ... what disciplinary action was taken and ... that ... it was properly followed.
Mr. Hileman brought up ... Best Interest of the Child Law. Once again ... there was a rebuttal ... with attitude .... "We represent ... the best interest of the State". Which Mr. Hileman is one of those We The People. Thus ... a member of the Body Politic. Provide ... Evidence ... Law. .. Procedure ... Rule under Law that ... there is no... Best Interest of The Child Law . If there is ... include ... how it has been applied and ... followed ... in this case and ... both cases. Provide ... Evidence ... Law ... Procedure and ... Rule under Law ... as to the Violations and ... what disciplinary action was taken and ... that ... it was properly followed.
No comments:
Post a Comment