Full Faith and Credit

For anyone who has experienced the cooperation between states, here is a little known definition in our US Constitution relating to "Full Faith and Credit".

Also below is a video, who brought this issue to the Supreme Court... ie NY vs CT. (Unfortunately, representatives from CT didn't appear.

Would like to thank those that are taking their concerns to the higher courts. If one reads the "legaleze" of the higher courts decisions, there are usually two main themes:

• The lower courts are not following the statutes they are bound to.. ie acting under the "color of law"; or
• The higher courts state that they can not judge on the merits since the lower courts weren't doing their job.

Do suggest that one searches the Appeals and/or Supreme court decisions at this link in the hopes they will find similar decisions to their concerns>>
Family Law
Divorce, Child Custody, Adoption...

Definition of "Full Faith and Credit"

(Original Link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Full_Faith_and_Credit_Clause )

"FFAC" redirects here. FFAC may also refer to Final Fantasy VII:Advent Children.

The Full Faith and Credit Clause is the familiar name used to refer to Article IV, Section 1 of the United States Constitution, which addresses the duties that states within the United States have to respect the "public acts, records, and judicial proceedings of every other state." According to the Supreme Court, there is a difference between the credit owed to laws (i.e. legislative measures and common law) as compared to the credit owed to judgments.^[1] Judgments are generally entitled to greater respect than laws, in other states.^[2] At present, it is widely agreed that this Clause of the Constitution has little impact on a court's choice of law decision,^[3] although this Clause of the Constitution was once interpreted differently.^[4]

Contents

• 1 History before ratification of the Constitution
• 2 Interpretation after ratification of the Constitution
• 3 Application to family law
• 4 Footnotes
• 5 External links

 ^{Video- Full Faith and Credit - Luna VS Dobson}

Uploaded by FelicitaLuna on May 13, 2011

I am Felicita Luna ( Luna vs Dobson ) In a CT. paternity proceeding I was denied a the right to be heard on the merits of my claim. I said that the Ct judgement should not receive Full Faith and Credit because I never had my day in court.

 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

May you find Strength in Your Higher Power,

 GranPa Chuck

  "We the "Little" People"

    Defend Yourself http://nfpcar.org/Jurisdictionary/

  My Family Reform Blog
  My Family Rights Affiliation 

 

Legal Template of Suing Social Workers-Title 42

This is an example of a case that went to the United States District Court in the Tucson Division of Arizona. The plaintiff, Kathy Vitarelli represented herself “pro se”. She indeed never gave up since it took about 5 years. So for your night time reading, you may want to go over this document.

The primary theme of this document was to sue the Social Workers, using Title 42, And even more important getting her child back. As near as I have learned, there was a settlement the day that this case was scheduled to go to trial.

Yes, one perhaps needs the right form. However, more important one needs to put the right stuff in this form. Perhaps one can use this as a template since there are many legal references throughout this 24 page document. Bottom line, you must organize statutes, policies, documentation, etc. particular to your concerns. As a non-legal term: “Get Your Ducks in Line”. This is true whether you have the assistance of a lawyer or not.

I am not a lawyer, I just like to research and read a lot. But then, I have to tell myself, I’m glad I am not a lawyer, since I do care for each and everyone. But I do know each and everyone needs to become an advocate for themselves. Just as Kathy did by being brave enough to go “pro se”.

• Original Document recently filed online by: riseuponwingsofeagles posted a link Vitarelli-Case-Title-42

I do have the “Text” version of this document.

• Summary of Proceedings: http://www.scribd.com/doc/34827146/AZ-Child-Custody-Case-Vitarelli-Cathy

Although I do not have a subscription to this site, it shows how many steps that were gone through over those 5 years.

• Related Reading: AZ Sheriffs Can't Read Fourth Amendment

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
May you find Strength in Your Higher Power,GranPa Chuck
  "We the "Little" People"
    Defend Yourself>>
  My Family Reform Blog
  My Family Rights Affiliation