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 Maverick Your Own Question
Maverick, Attorney
Category: Legal
Satisfied Customers: 6422
Experience:  20 years experience as a civil trial and appellate lawyer
Type Your Legal Question Here...
Maverick is online now
A new question is answered every 9 seconds

I have a question regarding FRAUD ON THE COURT in the state

Customer Question

I have a question regarding FRAUD ON THE COURT in the state of Virginia
Submitted: 2 years ago.
Category: Legal
Customer: replied 2 years ago.
My question is in regards ***** ***** Code Section 8.01-428(D) in regards ***** ***** Civil Order that was entered into the J&D Court in the State of Virginia. It is extremely complex in nature so not sure where to begin. First, note the Order defies the declaratory decree of the Judge that the Order be "mutually agreed upon," by the parties and one party objected to the Order but it was entered anyway without regard for the rule of the Court or additional rights of the objecting party, specifically that the custodial parent retained the exclusive right to have the final say in regards ***** ***** matters pertaining to the child if the parties disagreed after consultation. In addition, the Order purposely falsely represents the true and correct proceedings which took place as well as intentionally omits and/or misrepresents material facts for the sole purpose of losing the true and correct nature of the proceedings on the court as the presiding Judge was retiring and opposing counsel who drafted the order knew this. The Order of the Court and the Custodial Right was reasonably relied upon by the custodial parent; and counsel for the opposing party, being a trusted member of the court was also reasonably relied upon to adhere to ethical standards, which did not occur. Extensive damage resulted in the rule of the court which disregarded the Social Service recommendation that Supervised Visits continue between the child and the non-custodial parent who placed the parties minor child at risk pursuant to VA Code Section 63.2-100; however upon lifting of said supervised visits, the custodial parent was physically attacked at the first child exchange the parties were alone with the child, requiring the custodial parent to seek a Protective Order. The Protective Order was in place when the Order was entered as well, and the custodial parent whom had the Protective Order objected to the Order but it was entered despite the objection, protective order, and exclusive custodial right. The Order itself, again, omits the fact that Supervised Visitation was lifted by the Court and/or other factors such as stating that certain requests by the non-custodial parent were "denied" when in fact the specific request was "removed" as a result of the circumstances; as well as the custodial parent was awarded the modification; however, the Judge ruled that Opposing Counsel draft the Order. The Order was drafted in a manner that portrays the custodial parent whom did not put the child at risk as the party who is a 'negative' context. The non-custodial parent has utilized this deception and/or Fraud on the Court to commence further legal action against the custodial parent for small and/or minor infractions of the Order as it suits. There are other aspects that I cannot mention here for privacy purposes; however, in summary the Judge also after a pende lite Order and two days set for trial, rendered a decision after ruling that no testimony would be heard in the case from either party. The custodial parent does not understand how or why the court would allow such an Order to be entered and is seeking assistance under VA Code Section 8.01-428(D) and/or other remedy to ensure that the true and correct facts are represented; as well as to protect the exclusive right retained for 8 years now. Help!
Expert:  Maverick replied 2 years ago.

Welcome to Just Answer (“JA”)!

Please note that:

(A) The information we provide is general information for your educational purposes only;

(B) No attorney-client relationship or privilege is formed by communicating with a JA expert;

(C) If you want legal advice, you must consult with a local attorney of your choice in person before acting or deciding not to act based on any information given by a JA expert;

(D) When I feel that I have provided you with a complete answer, I will ask for you to assign a feedback rating so that JA will compensate me for my time. Please wait until then to assign the rating as initially I may still be getting more information from you to formulate a better answer; and

(E) You should not be concerned about any short delays between your questions and my replies. Please know that I answer most questions within the hour if I am signed on. If I am not signed on, then please know that I make every attempt to respond within 24 hours.

Thank you for taking the time to understand how this site works. By continuing, you confirm that you accept, understand and agree to these terms.


Yes § 8.01-428 can be used to relieve you from an order that was obtained by perpetrating a fraud upon the court; but it seems to me that you have a bigger problem than that. There appears to be judicial misconduct and bias at play and it may have to do with his relationship with the lawyers involved or his personal political slant on things. I would suggest that you go forward with this motion so that it buys you time to learn how to file an appeal if it fails.

No sure if this helps so just write me back with your other questions....