How JustAnswer Works:
  • Ask an Expert
    Experts are full of valuable knowledge and are ready to help with any question. Credentials confirmed by a Fortune 500 verification firm.
  • Get a Professional Answer
    Via email, text message, or notification as you wait on our site. Ask follow up questions if you need to.
  • 100% Satisfaction Guarantee
    Rate the answer you receive.
Ask Tina Your Own Question
Tina, Lawyer
Category: Legal
Satisfied Customers: 33167
Experience:  JD, BBA Over 25 years legal and business experience.
Type Your Legal Question Here...
Tina is online now
A new question is answered every 9 seconds

Where is Tina?

This answer was rated:

Where is Tina?

I will send your requested expert a message letting her know that you have a question for her. She will see it when she reads her email.

Hello again Diane and thank you for requesting me.

What is your legal question for me please? I look forward to assisting you.

Customer: replied 4 years ago.

Tina, good to hear from you.


Regarding the defamation law suit AND the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of law, the superior court judge in Washington State ruled in my favor and has ordered a permanent injunction against the defendant ever defaming me again - along with a judgment.

The judge also determined that the defendant is NOT the biological daughter of the famous musician she has been claiming is her dad, and as such the judge has ordered a reversal of the surname change that was clearly made to open doors world wide for the purpose of harming me - damaging … if not destroying my reputation in the professional world in which I work by falsely claiming to countless people around the world that I am a murderer, a child molester and an embezzler.

Although the judge is to sign this supplemental order today, the defendant has suddenly and somehow at the last minute managed to retain an attorney pro bono who is objecting to this supplemental ruling.

I have multiple takes on what might happen.

Based on your experience and expertise, in your opinion is it at all possible that in this unusual - even bizarre case - such an order to reverse a name change that was made to cause harm to another, is at all with in a Superior Court's jurisdiction in Washington State ... especially when at the time of the surname change, the defendant denied under oath that she was changing her name to "escape from debtors or bring harm to anyone" and then in fact did shortly thereafter severely defame and thus damage/harm me throughout the Internet to the point of extreme psychological, emotional, physical and financial distress?


Just asking.

Hello again, Diane. That is wonderful news! I am so glad to hear that the court entered the order in your favor. The judge must have been persuaded by your presentation of the case/evidence.

Do you know on what grounds opposing counsel is challenging the order? Have you read their pleadings yet or are you anticipating that they will challenge the court's order based on the lack of authority/jurisdiction to order the defendant to change her name?

Customer: replied 4 years ago.

Yes I have, and the claim is that it is not within the Courts jurisdiction based on the fact that anyone can change their name etc. Let me get please get back to you with further details. Thank you.

OK. That should be enough for me to at least address the issue. I will be off-line later today, but I will be back on-line tomorrow and respond to you as soon as return if you have a follow-up question or provide additional information.

We had discussed this issue in some depth before you obtained the injunction against this individual and I am of the opinion that the court does not have jurisdiction to reverse the name change, since that would normally involve invading the jurisdiction of another court, which courts cannot normally do, unless they are a court of appeal.

However, this argument would typically fail if the court merely ordered the individual to cease using the name as a means to deceive others or defame you prospectively. That language would NOT normally invade another court's jurisdiction and a court does normally have the equitable power to craft injunctive relief as broadly as necessary to stop a wrongdoing from occurring.

So I would normally consider filing a motion to modify the judgment, such that it is limited to prospectively requiring the defendant to cease using the surname as a manner in which to deceive others and defame you. That would typically constitute a good response to the argument being presented by the opposition, as I understand their argument to be, and would likely be granted by a court since it removes the present challenge to the court's order, which I believe is a valid argument and could support an appeal and reversal of the court's order on appeal.

I hope this helps clarify the situation for you.

It has been my pleasure to assist you. Kindly remember to rate my answer when our communication is completed so I will be compensated for my time in providing you with the information you requested. If you feel the need to provide a low rating, please stop and reply to me via the REPLY or CONTINUE CONVERSATION button with whatever issue or clarification you may need. I will be happy to continue further and assist you until I am able to explain your concern to your satisfaction. Please also remember that I cannot control whether the law is favorable to you or not, so please don’t shoot the messenger. Thank you and all the best to you in 2013.


Please feel free to bookmark the following link so you can request me to answer any future legal questions you may have:

Customer: replied 4 years ago.

Thanks Tina.


The judge's order was intended to have the individual cease using the name as a means of deceiving others - committing fraud and defaming me.


Based on the defendant's actions throughout the years, this law suit and up to just last month when she was trying to strike a book deal with a writer about this famous musician wherein she told him she was the biological daughter and I was a murderer, is what may have caused the judge to realize that something more severe really needs to be done. Based on the defendant's behavior, it is clear to all of us that this defendant is incapable of NOT using the surname change to deceive people and to continue defaming me.


I also do not believe the defendant will be able to afford to appeal the case as there was a $500,000 judgment granted by the court and the defendant, who claims to be a pauper, must place a bond.


Interestingly enough, while the defendant has claimed indigent status to the court, she is also on Face book and LinkedIn claiming to be a successful accountant and at one point the owner of a yacht.


I welcome your response.

Hello again, Diane.

I'm glad to hear that an appeal is not likely. Then this is probably her last ditch effort to seek relief from the judgment against her. This may come down to a question of semantics. Injunctive relief must normally be narrowly tailored to protect the interest being furthered by the order but not so broadly that it violates civil or constitutional rights.

Here, since you indicate the intent of the order is to prevent her from using the name in the future to deceive others and defame you, a simple modification of the order may be that is all that is necessary in order to thwart the defendant from continuing to argue, perhaps validly, that the court acted beyond the scope of its authority.

That is what I believe would typically need to happen in order to prevail on the motion at this point, based on the facts you have provided.

I hope this helps clarify the situation for you. If I don't talk to you again today or tomorrow, I wish you all the best on this. It sounds as though you are almost home free!


Tina, Lawyer
Category: Legal
Satisfied Customers: 33167
Experience: JD, BBA Over 25 years legal and business experience.
Tina and other Legal Specialists are ready to help you