3-18-2009 Order For Contempt Hearing
This document was uploaded by user and they confirmed that they have the permission to share it. If you are author or own the copyright of this book, please report to us by using this DMCA report form. Report DMCA
Overview
Download & View 3-18-2009 Order For Contempt Hearing as PDF for free.
More details
- Words: 461
- Pages: 3
'i:"I.'"'''.' ~l I I t ~J ::l'{ ~/ "'.
FRK
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF SHAWNEE COUNm~S!A$ COURT THIRD JUDi.CrA~ DIST. DIVISION THIRTEEN ~t Utt.nM, '" !'. ,.." 1\ t\ , ~ ;,.. In the Matter of the Marriage of: HAL RICHARDSON, Petitioner, vs. CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI, Respondent.
)
)
)
)
)
) )
)
)
ZOOq Hf\R I 8 P 2: I \
Case No. 96 D 00217
)
ORDER Now on this 17th day of March, 2009, the above-captioned matter comes before the Court, The petitioner appears in person and by counsel Donald Hoffman. The respondent does not appear. Thereupon the Court takes up the respondent's motion for recusal. The Court finds that pursuant to KS.A. 20-311d the motion was improperly filed but after review and consideration denies the motion for recusal. Ifrespondent wishes to proceed with her motion for recusal, she can proceed as outlined in KS.A. 20-311d(b). The Court finds the respondent was personally served with the Motion and Order to Appear and Show Cause for Contempt, scheduled for April 6, 2009 at 1:30 p.m., pursuant to KS.A. 60 303(d)(4). The Court appoints Kevin Cook, a member ofthe bar ofthe State ofKansas, as counsel of record to appear on behalf of respondent in all stages of the Contempt proceedings herein. The Court considers and denies the respondent's motion filed on December 29, 2008 entitled "Expedited Judicial Process", respondent's motion # 81 entitled "Motion For Court To Be In Compliance With Current Federal, State and Kansas Appellate Rulings In That The Last Of Order
1
Of This Court (December 16, 2008) Is In Direct Violation Of And Demands The Court To Correct Its megal Ruling Immediately And Take Any All Further Steps To Be In Compliance With The Current Laws Setforth", motion # 83 entitled "Motions for Orders ofJustice", and motion # 85 which is entitled the same as motion number 81. The Court finds that none of the respondent's motion allege any new information or any legal basis for overturning the Court's decision ofDecember 16, 2008 or offer any basis for granting a new trial or hearing pursuant to K.S.A 60-259. IT IS SO ORDERED.
~~~
DlvIJ57B. DEBENHAM DISTRICT COURT JUDGE
2
CERTIFICATE OF MAILING I hereby certify that a true and correct copy ofthe above and foregoing Order was deposited in the United States mail, postage prepaid, this }
N
day of March, 2009, addressed to the
following: Kevin 1. Cook, Esq, Cook & FisherL.L.P. 1206 SW lOth Topeka~-Kansas 66604
Claudine Dombrowski, Pro Se P.O. Box 4974 T~peka,__Kans~s 66604
Jill Dykes, Esq. 1243 SW Topeka Blvd. Topeka, Kansas 66612
Donald R. Hoffinan Hoffinan & Hoffinan CoreFirst Bank & Trust Building 100 E. 9th Street - 3rd Floor East Topeka, Kansas 66612
Dianne Plemons Administrative Assistant
3
FRK
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF SHAWNEE COUNm~S!A$ COURT THIRD JUDi.CrA~ DIST. DIVISION THIRTEEN ~t Utt.nM, '" !'. ,.." 1\ t\ , ~ ;,.. In the Matter of the Marriage of: HAL RICHARDSON, Petitioner, vs. CLAUDINE DOMBROWSKI, Respondent.
)
)
)
)
)
) )
)
)
ZOOq Hf\R I 8 P 2: I \
Case No. 96 D 00217
)
ORDER Now on this 17th day of March, 2009, the above-captioned matter comes before the Court, The petitioner appears in person and by counsel Donald Hoffman. The respondent does not appear. Thereupon the Court takes up the respondent's motion for recusal. The Court finds that pursuant to KS.A. 20-311d the motion was improperly filed but after review and consideration denies the motion for recusal. Ifrespondent wishes to proceed with her motion for recusal, she can proceed as outlined in KS.A. 20-311d(b). The Court finds the respondent was personally served with the Motion and Order to Appear and Show Cause for Contempt, scheduled for April 6, 2009 at 1:30 p.m., pursuant to KS.A. 60 303(d)(4). The Court appoints Kevin Cook, a member ofthe bar ofthe State ofKansas, as counsel of record to appear on behalf of respondent in all stages of the Contempt proceedings herein. The Court considers and denies the respondent's motion filed on December 29, 2008 entitled "Expedited Judicial Process", respondent's motion # 81 entitled "Motion For Court To Be In Compliance With Current Federal, State and Kansas Appellate Rulings In That The Last Of Order
1
Of This Court (December 16, 2008) Is In Direct Violation Of And Demands The Court To Correct Its megal Ruling Immediately And Take Any All Further Steps To Be In Compliance With The Current Laws Setforth", motion # 83 entitled "Motions for Orders ofJustice", and motion # 85 which is entitled the same as motion number 81. The Court finds that none of the respondent's motion allege any new information or any legal basis for overturning the Court's decision ofDecember 16, 2008 or offer any basis for granting a new trial or hearing pursuant to K.S.A 60-259. IT IS SO ORDERED.
~~~
DlvIJ57B. DEBENHAM DISTRICT COURT JUDGE
2
CERTIFICATE OF MAILING I hereby certify that a true and correct copy ofthe above and foregoing Order was deposited in the United States mail, postage prepaid, this }
N
day of March, 2009, addressed to the
following: Kevin 1. Cook, Esq, Cook & FisherL.L.P. 1206 SW lOth Topeka~-Kansas 66604
Claudine Dombrowski, Pro Se P.O. Box 4974 T~peka,__Kans~s 66604
Jill Dykes, Esq. 1243 SW Topeka Blvd. Topeka, Kansas 66612
Donald R. Hoffinan Hoffinan & Hoffinan CoreFirst Bank & Trust Building 100 E. 9th Street - 3rd Floor East Topeka, Kansas 66612
Dianne Plemons Administrative Assistant
3
Related Documents
3-18-2009 Order For Contempt Hearing
May 2020 6
Heath Order For Contempt
May 2020 16
Blueprint Contempt Hearing Transcript
October 2019 26
Transcript Of Contempt Hearing
May 2020 10
Order Contempt Enforce 032537
October 2019 28