Nevada's Welfare Department and other Nazi Bastards*
*Includes rubber-stamping, jack-booted Court Masters and jackass ADA's
Nevada's War on Grandparents and Grandchildren
Only in Nevada could this
I have news for those bastards. The internet is
still free. Here are the facts of how it works in Nevada.
7. Then, as in this case, the Court Master rubber stamps the ADA's complaint. He held the biological mother responsible for $5,000.
8. The Welfare department then reports to the Governor's office that they saved the tax payers $5,000 !! Of course, they probably failed to mention that it cost $30,000 in the court's time, the court assistant's time, the court clerk's time, typing various notifications, the welfare dept.'s employees time, filing of records and issuing rulings and so on and on and on.
Quiz: How many Hispanics on a percentage bases are
taken to this court compared to Caucasians on a percentage basis, I do wonder.
I'd guess 75% of Caucasians and 1% of Hispanics. Following in italics, is
the full plea to the Court Master which he refused to consider or even to
read. (Some identifying remarks of participants are herewith removed.)
Petition to the Court
Written May 30, 2014 by (the petitioner)
Your Honor Court Master,
Please Witness the following.
On xx xxx 2012, Case # FV12-xxxx, the Court Master
ordered that (the child's father), the father of (child's name),
would pay child support totaling $140.00 per month. The (child's father)
was unemployed at that time and continuing to be so until his death. He
died shortly after the aforesaid order for child support.
1. Later, as legal guardians of (child's name), we were not informed of any other Court Master’s ruling to require (child's mother) to pay child support nor were we informed to attend any hearing before the Court Master. We have never asked that (child's mother) to pay child support. She had no steady job between 2010 and 2014. She had no income and no savings. Had we been at the alleged hearing, we would have protested the Welfare Dept. requiring her to pay child support. The majority of time in 2012 and in 2013 she was under medical care. That care presently continues.
2. In February 2014, I (petitioner's name),
discovered that Medicaid for (child's name) had been canceled by
the Welfare department. I discovered this when I called the Medicaid Provider
to ascertain which Dentist was authorized to provide dental care for (child's
name). They informed me that her coverage had been canceled earlier by
Welfare Dept. for reasons
3. I managed to have (child's name)’s Medicaid restored after writing a letter of protest. (I could not get through on the telephone after waiting four hours). Therefore, we again complied with the Court’s order to provide medical converge for (child's name).
4. A letter
reportedly typed on 19 May 2014 by an unnamed person in the Reno's Welfare
Dept., Case ID xxx xxx xxx, and received by me in Sparks, NV on 29 May 2014,
stated that (A) The Medicaid (Medical Assistance) coverage for (child's
name) would be canceled on 20 June 2014; and
5. The Welfare Department is not the legal guardian of (child's name). The grandparents are the legal guardians under Nevada law.
6. That letter took ten days to go from Reno to Sparks based on the alleged date typed on the letter. ( I believe the letter was backdated.) The 13 day cut-off requirement makes it impossible to comply. Tomorrow is Saturday and by then the 13 day response time will have expired. This letter cannot arrive at the welfare Department until Monday or Tuesday. Furthermore, it will take the Welfare Dept. weeks to respond based on their past performance.
7. The Welfare Dept.’s letter stated that (child's name) no longer lived with us, or with the "Assistance Unit"-whatever that means, but they are in error again. (The child) has a private bedroom and living with her Legal Guardians as per the original Court’s order in 2011. She is cared for by her legal guardians. She lives in a safe environment. But the Welfare Dept. continues mauling and interfering with our legal rights as Custodians / Guardians.
8. Furthermore, another questionable action was taken by the Welfare Dept. They scheduled a court hearing deriving from Case No. FVxx-xxxxx on 2 June 2014. It’s suspicious that the letter of termination of Medicaid for (child's name) arrived just ONE business day before we must attend that hearing. I will be at the hearing, and I will support my daughter against the continuing persecution and harassment against my family by the Division of Welfare & Supportive Services.
9. The Notice for the latest hearing (in item 10), was addressed only to (the grandfather). That is improper. (Both grandparents) are the legally appointed guardians of (child's name). Yet the Welfare Dept. addressed the summons only to (the grandfather). This is sloppiness and incompetence on their part. The court proceedings scheduled for June 2014 should be permanently dismissed based on the overall incompetence and legal errors made by the Welfare Dept.
10. Regarding the Medicaid issue, (child's
mother) received a letter from Lewis Clark of the Welfare Dept. stating
that effective 1 June 2014 (child's mother) (child's name)’s
biological mother-but not her legal guardian, were authorized
for Medicaid. That is to say, the Medicaid
obtained for (child's name) by her legally
appointed Custodians is now co-joined with that of her biological mother,
(the child's mother)
who has no legal standing or rights whatsoever.
Taking those letters together, we can logically
conclude that the Welfare Dept. already made the decision to move control
of medical care for (child's name)
from (the legal guardians)
child's biological mother). That
was just one Business day prior to the court hearing ordered for June 2014.
They are conniving at least and criminals at most.
They should be fired.
They are conniving at least and criminals at most. They should be fired.
This concludes this compilation of facts. I pray that the court takes these facts into consideration and dismisses the hearing of June 2014, because the Welfare Dept. used ambush tactics and may have violated the law, and certainly compromised the Court’s order by a real Judge in 2011.
(signed by petitioner.)