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 Law Educator, Esq. Your Own Question
Law Educator, Esq.
Law Educator, Esq., Attorney
Category: Legal
Satisfied Customers: 116753
Experience:  JA Mentor -Attorney Labor/employment, corporate, sports law, admiralty/maritime and civil rights law
Type Your Legal Question Here...
Law Educator, Esq. is online now
A new question is answered every 9 seconds

omg. PAUL,your the MAN! i have GREAT NEWS! rather to show your

This answer was rated:

omg. PAUL,your the MAN! i have GREAT NEWS! rather to show your astute self,sir the opine of U.S.District Fed.Ct.on another case remember? your always saying,we are going to help "TINA" get where she need to be,and that is 1 step yep closer to her /JUSTICE, final justice.Decision paul is now here! i need your opine,on what it all means,even if i see the judge is a ASTUTE guy,for sure,CPS is
crying i am sure tonight,you are able to review it???
Thank you very much for the update.

I am around, let me know the link.
Customer: replied 4 years ago.

i m here its heather-marie.


"now like 2 lawyers are adaging,"they are both interested" that fast! i know

1 lawyer who i respectfully XXXXX XXXXX may say,well just wait to see if she can, is able to "convince"your honor,why this suit should NOT be dismiss and god is good, as my own prowess, i might say so myself paul LOL Laughingtitle="Laughing"/> the fact it is so good! hint*

she did not lose!* so read it..


and I need a clear answer i think it mean"only to the EXTENT(judge last page say)to 1983,in cps"official"is only 1 got dismiss,out of MULTIPLE WORKERS,then he talk bout the egregious conduct, etc, and how ALL the claim(s)cause of actions are allow to move forward!!! here u go!



i am so thrilled i am shaking with "tina"and our staff, many people here with her child,and "tina" her dad tonight,at the student of law advocate ctr

i told her i think ALL her claims in indivi.capacity move forward yes! but i will triple check with you.



etc. but naturally your able to review,we are BEYOND happy tonight,she fought paul

get this TEN YEAR(return of child COMPLETELY UNDERMINE thanks to nj cps

agency DYFS,DCF,now called DCPP. and i have 2 attorneys ready to take her on

now,and ONE still tonight as i write your update ON FONE WITH TINA now and i m

just so happy .ok waiting to hear your well-written answer, STATE DID NOT REPLY


nope. I M HAPPY SHE EVEN WON AT RES JUDICATA! that is a rarity nationwide hard to do...yep and individual capacities, i think it say if i am right,only dismiss in official capac.right?


get back! we are so so happy tonight!



bellas law student powerhouse paralegal consulting and empowerment.

a NATION's first.


against inequities,involving abhorrent cps; under sec 1983

and gross negligent"intentional act"harming America's Most beautiful

innocent... and that is the children..and GOOD loving parent;grandparents U.S.A.







You have indeed read it right. DYFS was dismissed as an agency and agents in their official capacities were dismissed, but the claims against the individuals were NOT dismissed and will proceed and this should have DYFS sweating right now, especially if she proves all of these charges in court showing how incompetent and untruthful DYFS social workers are and how they harm children more than help them.


I truly aim to please you as a customer, but please keep in mind that I do not know what you already know or don't know, or with what you need help, unless you tell me. Please consider that I am answering the question or question that is posed in your posting based upon my reading of your post and sometimes misunderstandings can occur. If I did not answer the question you thought you were asking, please respond with the specific question you wanted answered.

Kindly remember the ONLY WAY experts receive any credit at all for spending time with customers is if you click on OK, GOOD or EXCELLENT SERVICE even though you have made a deposit or are a subscription customer. YOU MUST COMPLETE THE RATING FOR THE EXPERT TO RECEIVE ANY CREDIT, if not the site keeps your money on deposit.

Also remember, sometimes the law does not support what we want it to support, but that is not the fault of the person answering the question, so please be courteous.

Law Educator, Esq. and 4 other Legal Specialists are ready to help you
Customer: replied 4 years ago.

i knew it!!!!!!!!!!!!! u know what ? this THREAD WILL STAY OPENNNN!

i want the world to know HEATHER-MARIE, and not even lawyers"yet" until AFTER the procurement of law school naturally,and not only jersey but in the multi-states,i am and SHALL succeed in the procurement of law degree juris doctor,THIS FIELD only,99% lol. i feel so happy paul thank you sir!

i appreciate

1. astute answers to "what i already knew!"

2.caring enough the site is awesome and your a extreme astute lawyer who unlike most "SEEN"the inequities,and i believe paul JUDGE---- do too!


lastly, paul so again"EACH ARGUEMENT" A SWEEP ALMOST"



1 res judicata DO NOT APPLY. judge agree,with what your saying as other law research i utilize, premise on"claim even if mom/daughter seek damages fromm 03! the NEW CLAIM(s)again are from for MOM 2010

and"child"now 19 from her 10 years old,03-04 so it make sense right?


CPS never argue against a pro-se plaintiff against this Dummies who think they are able to harm a child,lie on a GOOD happy,suburban mom

in this case,who was always THERE keeping child safe,and try to use

this weak argument of"1 light spanking" 10 yrs ago,this is so good paul


and also the arguement significant!(the fact the workers gross negligent

has to be clear here right paul??? the fact new jersey caseworker not one,but all of them up to 10! knew for years, the allegations were false

and HID,such truthful fact,kept child in group homes, "drugged up"as

found later paul and as a result of failure to return; MOM and child suffer

so much.



i await your response.look like the parent won after all when 100+ yes paul 100+ attorneys say NO,she can't win,she can't make it past first hurdle premise on "1 light discipline"one lil spanking,in 03-04,they we4re all wrong.and 2 OF THEM NOW ADMIT IT tonight.



i await your response,to "understand more about the aforesaid,look like almost a clean sweep! but again she was not suing them under 83 in official so"what happen there?" and again she is able to though still under 1983, if i am right from lawyer saying tonight,THIS IS REALLY GREAT that she is(As your saying able as individuals right????)


ok i am here,take ur time,be on with research,and tina here,so take ur time just almost a sweep lawyer say but i want YOUR opine.





Thank you for your response.

Yes, she won. DYFS only won a small victory in getting the agency out of the suit, but the main violators, the lying social workers are going to have to go to trial on their gross misconduct.

Hopefully she can get a decent attorney in there now to do as good of a job as she did getting this case to this point.
Customer: replied 4 years ago.

i was speaking with "tina"and her (paul the teen 19 is i mean REALLY so beautiful!)at age 10 i c pix,then 19 just as beautiful lil girl,sad she has had a great life,PRIOR so sad, "all evidence"From a kid"proven,nickelodeon tv commercials,as truthful the suit say to "working on latina;spanish songs. to pop danze;hip hop stuff,so sad paul to" 9 hospitals(that WE all know of)as we know CPS hid boxes of real evidence,so we are sure more will during next phase discovery RIGHT PAUL???? what is next i think discovery just askin' thank you! or what happen now cause we have nothing else to see but the GREAT "almost sweep" etc. with the suit thank you...and yes the lil modicum of a "victory"is big whoop the AGENCY is"out of it,but wait !(next query to above is, "it say as FAR AS TO THE "EXTENT" the agency,so is the agency still "liable"individual or

the workers, either way it is awesome she won!


easier now attorney sayin to me how"he want to see me with tina awww"

cause I DID A "bEYONd"great job,wit her and the MOTHER too!we both



and the owner my colleague(melendez)get back to me thank you SOOOO






The next phase is discovery and she is going to have to submit discovery requests for all documents and personal notes of the social workers. Of course, they will try to fight turning them over and since DYFS is out of the case as an agency, she would have to subpoena the records from DYFS. Also, she is going to have to depose all of these people (or she should, because I know money is tight, but it would be nice to nail them to a story in a deposition). The attorney may skip the depositions because of the costs, based on what the evidence she has so far shows.

Thank you again.
Customer: replied 4 years ago.


and also i know a "Settlement demand"PRIOR to the procurement via subpoena,(they are going to NOT!)want this,paul your reading the suit right?

look at al the'extreme cruelty GROSS Misconduct,heck a judge in state ct.

sure did paul,let me REMIND you before anything is the fed WISE judge got this BIG Huge hurdle right yes,but the new"state judge"who FIRST TIME learn of this BIG mess,of a lie after lie keeping DELIBERATE a parent of no past history of drugs,alcohol,abuse etc. nothing,but kept her from even a 1 phone call???? he call it the WORSE NEW JERSEY CASE WITH CPS.

that transcript she will be procuring now,and also again keep in mind paul the fact:


1. D.Y.F.S. has a longggggg NJ propensity to doing this but NEVER ok?

not 1 time was at all EVER! proven whereas; "child was rape"and or beat up;sexually abused,bullied in foster care,and where"Worker"no good self,KNEW but"evidence"was actually EXISTING! yes paul to

have existed,"is intent to deprive"IF SHE BURY IT RIGHT PAUL?

find out later; her own supervisory personnel"sign off on things"and yet




2. DYFS has lost another suit in 003,05,07,multiple settlement(s)09,10

2 or more "quiet"settement,i've learn about on MY OWN sure did and few after this 2011 cps settle another suit nj,and another just last year and now the CASE YOUR READING i sent you to review just now,with atty.

survive a MOTION TO DISMISS,for"individual workers"not the agency

etc. so now?Melendez!


we are so happy get back thank you.


MOST EXPERTS for years,say the JURY is not who dyfs will want to see



they did cover it in 08,09,2010 but were awaiting with bells on with mom

the BIGGEST (At this point decision)on if SEVERAL not 1 but all the most horrid workers known today,anywhere,DID this and if they can beat motion to dismiss,and we FINALLY PROVE by hard,HARD WORK here;

they were not able to Get away from such GROSS beyond"mere" negligence

INTENTIONAL misconduct! no jury experts are sharing with me by video consult,phone call(s)consulting NO JURY CPS will want to hear this

with DYFS NJ KNOWN NATIONWIDE as the worse cps agency for


many years,even was on tv about this several times,PRIOR;

to /"TINA" Laughingcompelling; and much warranted claim(s)and her child.


hey paul,remember sir, YOUR 1 who was not"sure either"mom suit portion remember?will survive"everything"but she did!!!

remember,your saying oh heather the child claim is THERE without a shadow of a doubt naturally easily.yep.will settle if prudent;


and the "parent"not sure premise on 1 substantiated of a fake abuse i.e. "spanking!"but look judge did not care in fed.ct.

meaning that was ten years ago! and CPS stil fail to return her!

they should have as the court say,"mom said CLEARLY''

the light spanking,was not the BASIS!(to keep a child from home)but 33 "really bad,serious horrid allegations"were what kept mom from child as APPEAL AGREE PAUL get this 04,07,09 told dyfs to properly INVESTIGATE,"stop violating mom"and child be returned,OR AT LEAST PARENTING TIME AS HER RIGHTS ARE TO BE RECOGNIZE,BUT DYFS CROOKED SELF NEVER EVEN DID NOTHING BUT HINDER,HINDER HINDER, 7.5yrs.paul!



"TINA"is right,this is surely NOT state bias court,from here in

NJ NY,PA, cps workers,to fla.,michigan crooked dhs,to hawaii,all over,workers are like this,but lawyer saying to her,and myself NOT THIS TIME;

the state

court ALLOW IT but not glad we are "there"now in federal court

where i believe FINAL JUSTICE after 10 long painful years,to a once

HAPPY un-abusive family will come$ and help so many when they do win

more than i,and she has right now.



i am so happy!



The last thing CPS ever wants is bad publicity. They certainly do not want a jury because many people on the juries know someone who has been abused by these crackpot social workers or they have children and would be horrified at the gross misconduct.

You guys are doing a great service to people, keep it up. Hopefully you can get her an attorney and get this moving forward to get her closure.
Customer: replied 4 years ago.

thnk you sir! your awesome

and lastly



(when your having a moment,BEFORE i accept plz review fast the case

above with attorney who again case was i think surviving motion to dismiss against the workers;as as tina's not the actual workers who let a lil boy! be physically abused,and "emotionally traumatize verbal abuse."yep.




about lawyers?

oh yes,already spoke with tonight a few.


and have multiple consult all weekend and this week.

i know she is even with money tight,by seeing if she is able to commence discovery;and she will be subpoena "ALL."this is a definite,paul.equally are all guilty for yes covering the fact she was INNOCENT,and how 1 spanking;

all social workers;cps,dyfs,dcpp,dcf, workers in new jersey on this lawsuit, paul yep, they ALL knew!( documentation exhibit demonstrated how workers in new jersey,were just not able to substantiate abuse premise on 1 light spanking to daughter 10 years old, not injured;


VERY VERY smart at 10

very healthy same day playing and loving her mother,and a good life,


as a little girl with hard working educated mom,

but they SAT ON THE REPORT PAUL 03-04 throughout 09 etc. 2010

this, is how it all went downhill from there,and KNEW "Dad" a addict"met 1 of their own.(a state county ems)wrker no good herself,and she also was a lady who herself,"consult with dyfs on cases!" mom LEARN later this, as her "ex custody lawyer" who help her also find cases,so the causative


and,all workers again "sat on the report clearing mother of the spanking

which we ALL know is not abuse naturally and the 33 serious allegations

etc. just lied all the time,to keep child with 'dad"who clearly was not fit

to parent a cat, let alone daughters! BUT DID THIS AGAIN CAUSE HIS NEW WIFE,DID CONSULT ON CASES(AS A Self Admitted consultant

and ems"county" worker,supervisor.


so we are glad this was found out;learned,discover supporting such link

as to WHY 10+ workers AND supervisors will RISK everything and now?

they are being re-assigned,2 fired so far,furtively ! and more i am sure

will.hopefully ONE DAY LOCK UP but until then LAWSUIT IN FEDERAL COURT AGAINST CPS worker,is good enough,

more suits pro-se we are proving is the way to at "The least"get EM WHERE IT HURTS, in the pockets,as many attorneys always say this,and let us hope now we get

one for her,meaning here at my network,and staff and i are going to begin

the quest,not just tonight but morning,but TILL THEN we are helping steady as all others,pro-se.







As we have discussed on this case, it is one where these social workers were worse than grossly negligent. Based on their acts, once you present the evidence to the court and win the federal case I would consider even filing criminal charges with the DA as their conduct is worse child abuse than anything that CPS has ever protected children from and they were intentionally involved in this case and the harm that came to the child.
Law Educator, Esq. and 4 other Legal Specialists are ready to help you
Customer: replied 3 years ago.

afternoon paul


i accept 2 answers here,thank you again!


real quick(or when reading this)the "agency dyfs(nj)it reads,the agency is dismissed"insofar as the officia capacities;and the workers"but they are on the hook for the actual"individual"am i correct paul?so do it mean the mom and daughter,are able to regarding the damages;liable also not just the caseworkers,foster parents(hired by dyfs)and the supervisors,but do it again mean also,the agency can be held liable individual(dyfs itself)

or again the main ulprit the workers,get back no rush,thank you so much!


and again i ACCEPT 2 answers, your the best!




Thank you.

The agency might be liable for the conduct of the social workers under the theory of "respondeat superior" but the agency is saying they acted outside the scope of what the agency hired them to do and the court has left the social workers personally liable meaning that she is going to collect from the social workers and once she wins the case then she would have to pursue the agency arguing that they are liable to pay the damages under respondeat superior, that would be the second part of her case.
Customer: replied 3 years ago.

oh i see! thank you sir.


as one case pending quite analogous, (i sent u the link i think couple days ago)well,that lawyer is suing the same way she did,i.e. she encompass as your sentient of,(aware)the dyfs and "individual caseworkers"etc. foster parents contracted by state of nj, the'lawyer suit'similar,expound as she did how the workers "under the watch naturally of dyfs etc.acted outside scope etc.of employment etc. color of law etc.and i know that firm won the right to move forward as "tina"and her daughter for money damages,at the depo; phase now; etc. and i m

just saying all this premise on fact,in that case too the agency was not to be held liable,BUT the workers are!Laughing so amazing "tina" with our help

was able to do exactly.the same just about,and more yes,damages as we shared with you as your even seeing "NOT JUST GROSS" and or a mere act of omission or negligent,but downright illegal,so much of the evidence paul that should have been disclose,was conceal,all the furtive"foster care danger"all hidden,knowingly evidence support it.

so this suit,yea is more powerful than the one pending with lawyer.

naturally.luckily TINA is able to prove it,as attachment,several was presented,and i do believe paul even when not always warranted at this stage, it show the judge in fed.ct. "TINA"child was really gang rape and harmed,not 1x but repeatedly. outside group home (still under state supervision)and inside group home,BOTH



remember your adage,not sure if she was able"to get em'on outside the group home rape"well this is what the fed.ct. CLEARLY is allowing to all move forward,i m happy because paul think about it,"it happen while the state was"lieing,false statement of "child is fine" under (key word here) is

UNDER,state supervision no 'harm' is coming her way judge,but yet the evidence support the complete antithesis.


FED.CT. so far is rightfully not agreeing with dyfs thinly-weak arguement

about well,"some of the abuse"happen outside the foster home???"i am sure fed.ct. is ignoring this because they "read"the dr. report where it say it and would have not done this IN TINA FAVOR,if a state agency whose

SUPERVISING the child,is not :liable for that...Naturally they are,because

the child again was"under their care and supervision"


and they had FULL responsibility for her,no 1 else,since it was the state

who assume custody,"control"and "supervision of this child paul,when they decided to remove her,and FAIL to reunite by the non-adherence

of cps protocol,policy, the way this INCREDIBLE ruling appear to be is the judge did not at all BUY"any of the state"weak arguement and we love it!







Thank you for your response.

I think she is going to be able to seek to hold the agency liable based on the agency theory because it was more than just one employee who acted in this grossly negligent conspiracy. I believe that in any case, she is going to get a judgment against these incompetent social workers and at that point she will likely see the agency theory come into play to make them pay for their misdeeds of their employees.
Law Educator, Esq. and 4 other Legal Specialists are ready to help you
Customer: replied 3 years ago.



perfectly said again thank you sir.They have no case,and discovery shall

illuminate this,in furtherance,to what the judge already ruled"correct"on.

NO DISMISS of lawsuit,Motion to dismiss involving DYFS crooked workers shall be DENIED,such a great thing! Will help so many others in such nationwide cases with CPS,and here in nj/ny/pa tri-state area.

appreciate it paul.



i will be keeping you in touch. and now! next? (continue all sunday)as i help the file)litigants,legal research"properly" etc. write-up researching with them,and for them, we are also today going to call more lawyer(s) and paul will just commence a new thread during week so we can close this one thank you so much.we agree,and thank you again paul.



Thank you again. I look forward to you keeping me up to date on this case as I am sure she is going to end up with a victory and it would likely be the DYFS will settle with her to avoid the publicity of her exposing the lying and incompetent social workers and their conspiracy against her.
Customer: replied 3 years ago.

i ACCEPT another answer, well worth the three i've accept since friday yes!

and oh paul i ran this by,(Real quick final note)for this thread, i spoke to a law professor,he has 25 years in law field mostly cases in California,Family Court,and NYS "criminal law" and NJ he has done "pro-hac vice"we both know what this is,and he is interested IF i am able to procure attorney here in NJ,for which he has won prior,cases in cali,lawsuit against cps,san diego and ventura county i think it is,and riverside nys (1)and he was reading this all weekend,and he say,"Heather,the 'attorney on "just answers"paul is correct on all counts,as your saying really same as him,he read the thread and the decision,and he is very interested,will even FLY when warranted,for
"tina's victory he say,she is going to make out just fine money damages

is there"meritorious claim(s) one "after another"and now we are looking

today monday tue. for a nj lawyer to work with him,then he can represent

her with a nj attorney! through pro hac vice,i hope so paul.i am trying as you know.


and "media"WILL be taking over this story(2 reporters)air it 08,2010 the

prior suit,but this one is won!(last won was toss out prior to statute of limit



such a great victory...


the caseworker(s)are surely liable.

and the cali atty.adaging,"the nj dyfs"lose so many cases,in fed ct.

and will be prudent to settle.give child full-closure,and the mother.

if not? A JURY SURE WILL HAVE A FIELD DAY,hearing why one by

one. workers:


1. hid evidence BONAFIDE. not "hearsay. by a angry parent.

2.conceal nj little girl age 10,from her mother,for almost 8 yrs,lied in court as to the status"true condition as JUDGE even said,relating to her welfare in "State"care and UNDER state supervision,then knew child was "not living with dad" but yet deprive mom DUE PROCESS,to have

a hearing,on returning"child to the mother"since child was moved from her father residence.


lastly i want u to also remember:

DYFS NJ,advocate for a troubled father to have custody right paul?

Mom light spanking"appeal three times NOT ONCE,but three times"

on the record,advise dyfs workers sternly(To preclude from depriving a

child from her parent" by "Swift investigation"of 33 alllegations"and if not founded,child AND parent can "no longer be DEPRIVE..."such right.


The allegations took "to be investigated paul from 03-04,jan.may 2010!


There just is no excuse,for this at paul. Cali lawyer interested adaging

"if the appeal order this

THREE TIMES, and was never done."what excuse will dyfs have at trial

to "why the caseworkers(10)failed to investigate?UNLESS by all means

even those of "unlawful nature"he adage,"is what MATTER to CPS"

... nothing more..."As long as the girl was kept from the other parent,it was well worth "breaking the law"the lawyer said to me all morning.


and THIS IS SINISTER,this is illegal,and he goes,"This is going to help

cement her lawsuit,that is basically after this recent decision already won.

This was a shock to him,adaging,how"to IGNORE any state appeal that

is advising them of a court-directive for not 1 month!(Bad enough)but 7 yrs? he say this suit is won PERIOD.

as a result that kept depriving child to safety by"Being return to mom"and

deprive PARENT as FED.CT. say,"of a life with her child paul."





Thank you.

Yes, I think you have them nailed to the wall here Heather. If you get this attorney involved that would be the last nail in them as DYFS is going to be begging to settle this case as they would be foolish to let this case continue after the court handed them a HUGE defeat in this last decision.
Customer: replied 3 years ago.

ok thank you paul definitely of course i am goin to keep you posted.


and enjoy rest of your weekend! thank you again.



off to attorney hunt!


and i will let you know,when 1 is brought on.we sure will advise ya!

will keep you posted....





Thank you again.
Customer: replied 3 years ago.

paul query relating to this thread;appreciate it.'


1. (the won-motion to dismiss for money damages,for child and mom is consistent with the actual(all of the claim(s)am i correct from 02-2010) and or only 2010 injury? if a lawyer is reading this right,he should know

if i stand corrected,the magistrate adage,"can sue from 2003-2010? since RES JUDICATA"does not apply" and or "mom claim(s)

as cited,new claim etc.

hers is yes from 2010(but daughter if we are reading this right,is from 03,the "day of removal"and for the continued-misrepresention ongoing;

the actual failure to return throughout 7 years. just need a bit of clarity of this.


2.Reason i ask is i thik 1 lawyer,was not"reading this right to say it is only

for the"2010"claim(s)from whe mom learn of such gruesome paridgm of

sex abuse,rape(s)sexual molestation;and psychiatric hospitalization etc.

suicide attempt,and when mom was cleared officially after"7"years of NO

proper investigation;(2010 clear)i don't think a was reading this at all accurate,if your wanting it re-sent to you i shall do let me know.

I told him this is inaccurate,the suit clearly allow all damage(s)cause of

action,etc. 1 through 10 etc. all claims to move forward,NONE were toss

out.etc only"agency"premise on"official capacity." some lawyer(s)i know

just read too fast,but yet and or "maybe because this is a local counsel"

i think he is not into suing"state worker"even though he admit,they are

lousy worse in NATION lol.and but i also think he has"alot of state court

biz,and is not comfy,doing this,but i told him,just be HONEST,and say it.

because unless i am reading this wrong,as 2 other lawyers saturday it is

claims from not just 2010(yes mom is from as judge put it)2010,so she is

able to move forward! and but DAUGHTER is from 2003, if i am correct

in their individual capacities.

1) The mom can sue on the new claim against the social workers because the judge said res judicata did not apply to her new claims based on their conduct from 2003. It seems the judge said that mom could take the claim back to the beginning because these were new claims not raised in the first suit. The daughter can take her claims all the way back to 2003.

2) I believe that the judge is saying because her claims were based on recently discovered evidence and not on the old claims and these claims were against the individuals they could go back to 2003.
Customer: replied 3 years ago.

ok update sir.

i am just reading this(i knew it)i am interviewing alot of lawyers we know ny

is huge! and in nj naturally my tri-state,but 1 in cali"still"calling me daily since saturday thats nice! and he himself adage,"the other atty.must have a connection with state"we know how this goes,i.e. alot of regular state court biz,and not interested,but just is trying to "wimp out" by not saying it,lol i agree on that,and sad but that is how the ball bounces,in this crooked cps game.But i m still glad the CALI attorney will fly out he say as soon as i m able to locate atty. in ny or nj tri-state,where then the 2 of them naturally can easily handle this entire case,from here on in,he say it is much"easier"now! all around for the mother"tina"and her injured child.


same as your saying,she "won"and deep down he say DYFS NJ know it and will be prudent to reach her by now even and offer a settlement.


But we all will see!


just wanted you to know,a update,definitely keeping you posted,no prob there.i will be calling another 50 if warranted,as i did for her a year when

file(most did not call back sad...)but as your seeing the ones who say she

"Can't win"or it is so hard getting pass even for"some lawyers"motion to dismiss,but look! all dozens who turn her down was WRONG .

she got pass,it with a sweep

NO QUALIFIED IMMUNITY,and now again couple we did speak with "are reviewing it,the decision"so we will see.

but i am still calling new attorneys,i have not reach ever for her,since we have some time right now.

(BEFORE she on her own mail letters out re:





I think you may do best getting the out of state attorney if you can get a local attorney to agree to allow him to sign on pro hac vice.

Personally, I think DYFS is going to settle once this evidence is produced of how their social workers conspired to illegally deprive a parent of their child and as a result the child suffered harm such as this.
Customer: replied 3 years ago.

yep. i do agree sir,histrionic(s)even by simple search on net.establish the countless lawsuit(s)won per year,almost past decade from paul 03, when this happen to MAJOR failure of the system)2 boys won 7.5 mill

1 son die rip. sad story the 2 remain are teens now,and other boy was who

die 7 only sad,and more suit 12.5 settle yep(year after!)04-05

then 07(closed-settlement NOT public i find it,as a GREAT paralegal and legal professional researcher will do...i find that one,and another not made public (Settlement(s) i find)are in totality almost 8 yep and then another one made public few back to back! yep from 2010-2012.just last year yep.and 1 pending now!(third district)i sent link to u,is pending sure is,so that attorney i call up and left msg.for waiting for his call)as we speak.




your saying"get out of calling state attorneys?) wait,i mean when i say

state i mean i m calling the'NEW JERSEY"STATE LICENSE ATTY'S" as i think in order to be pro hac vice,qualified(the nice lawyer in california)

he say i have to get a nj attorney license,whose able to work with him

am i correct?or we are missing something,please expound thx.


and lastly:

NEW YORK has so many great civil right cases,and i just need 1 to say

YES! we will come on board(but don't he have to be license paul in nj)

to take it on





That is correct, you do have to get a NJ attorney to agree to sign on to work with the CA attorney pro hac vice. So you need to get a NJ attorney, but the CA attorney would do all of the work.

If you can find a NY attorney, they can take it on either by being licensed in NJ or by getting a NJ attorney to agree to work with them just like the CA attorney would have to do
Customer: replied 3 years ago.



hi good evening.

just seeing this,and thank you again.

i just wanted more clarification.

i have place many calls,shall continue,as

our student of law staff,and we are all aggressively

hunting for right attorney for her.thank you again!

definitely keeping you posted on all of this,

paul.But meanwhile; should "tina"commence the sending out of letters

for discovery request;subpeonas;for interrogatories;etc. or she still i think has time,correct?(decision as your aware came down allowing her to move forward a week ago,today. (but again we ALL are aggresively searching for a lawyer. and or i am not sure but she also want to know to

write a settlement demand?

I know a lawyer mention to me"wait"on the demand letter for now though.

But just want your consensus on both thank you.







Thank you for your response.

Yes, you should have her start to send out her discovery requests, the requests for production at least for now as they have no limit and save the interrogatories and requests for admissions and depositions if needed for the attorney.

Send discovery first and then about a week later send out the letter for a settlement demand if she likes or she can wait on the attorney to do that.