Menu
Login
Nicholas Murphy owes his now, ex-wife, in excess of $150, 000. as a result of an Order which was entered in 2008 but made retroactive from December 2006 in Doylestown, Pennsylvania.
This Order for Child & Spousal Support was entered on behalf of two children and his wife, at the time, who has Multiple Sclerosis. Never once has the deadbeat father paid what the Order called for, although he dissipated an annuity in 2006 in the approximate amount of $30, 000 as well as having received 1099 income of over $100, 000 in the same year. Finally, after two years of being Noticed to appear in Court, from the date of filing of December 2006 to June 2008, an Order was finally entered against deadbeat father after Mother waited almost two years for any type of Support, at all.
Although he was served Notices to Appear over a two year period, the Court afforded him "rights" in order to be certain he was served with the Notices to Appear.
Finally, after the Order was entered, he then began a litigious battle against Mother and the Court, stating among other things that he was never served with the Order to Appear in Support. In addition, although he never supplied any of his documentation as to employment, earnings, receipts, etc. (all documents were received by subpoena issued by Mother's counsel) he said he was poor and did not earn enough to pay the support Order.
I should also mention that one of the children is a diabetic who needs insulin and deadbeat father allowed the health insurance to lapse.
One other thing...the Annuity deadbeat father took out (without Mother's permission) was with the assistance of his sister who banked with a credit union and used her long history of banking with the credit union to tell a lie to an employee who worked at the bank in order to secure a Notorial Seal evidencing Mother's signature.
(The sister told the notary that Mother was at the hospital bedside of her diabetic son and needed money for the operation. However, Mother did not want to leave her son's bedside so the deadbeat's sister went to the Notary and pleaded with him to sign the Notorial Seal as a favor to her and her brother so he and his then Wife could take out the Annuity money and use it for the operation for their son).
Not only is the deadbeat father a low life but it seems his sister is, as well. Need I say more?
All of the above is a matter of record with the Bucks County Courthouse.
Comment to Dawniette..First, it is not unethical to post "things like this" on the internet. What I posted was not hearsay, (ck your spelling, please). Nor was the post any sort of "innuendo". The correct definition of innuendo being, an indirect intimation. The commentary made was not indirect in any way...It was very direct, don't you think? As I stated in the last sentence,
"All of the above is a matter of record with the Bucks County Courthouse". This means that what was stated is a part of the court record as testimony. Therefore, what I stated was not hearsay, as it is not only part of the court record but also documentation supports all that was stated. Of course, the "low life" designation was mine and mine alone since that is opinion. Regardless, anyone who makes a baby has a duty to support his children. That is why it is the law. The law does not recognize that one parent is the sole means of support when there is an able bodied father who works and is capable of assisting in the childrens support. I am sure you are aware that children and their upkeep is quite expensive.
Most "payors" (those that pay into the court for their kids, whether Mother or Father) seem to think that the support is only for monies that are given directly to the children, like clothing for them or when they are taken out to eat at a restaurant...However, that is not the case. When you live in a house that is owned or rented and you have children, the costs are increased by having children reside in that property. If owned, one must pay water, electric, gas, etc. This is not including of course, food. I know many payees, whether Mother or Father that have growing kids and they say that their supermarket bills are astronomical because the kids eat a lot. So in sum, the child support pays for that child's portion of living in a residence and, of course, eating as well as any clothing. As we all know, the cost of EVERYTHING has increased and wages for the middle class have remained stagnant since the 1950's.
So, how do the payee's make it? Well, the one I spoke of has to have help from her parents and now, new husband. If it weren't for the new husband, the children would have to be covered under the state's medical plan. This isn't to say that the state's plan is the worst BUT Personal Choice is better. It seems disgraceful to me that the children's own father can not pay for their medical coverage. The children's step-father is doing it.
Either way, the point is, in all of this, there is no reason for me to have to write any of this...Father should be dutifully paying for his children's support on a weekly basis and Mother, who was given an "earning capacity" (meaning, the court attributed a wage to her in order to come up with a proper calculation of what Father should pay. Just because Mother has MS, does not mean that the court gave her an earning capacity of -0- and decided that she did not have the ability to earn some type of wage. Remember, the "earning capacity" of a parent may not be exactly what they are earning at any given time. It may very well be what a court decides the person is capable of earning, after testimony and hearing in the case) at the time of trial, should not have to rely on her parents and new husband to support father's children or they would be destitute. I hope you see my point. Thank you for your attention and courtesy.
The complaint has been investigated and resolved to the customer’s satisfaction.
Boo ###ing Who...This is what happens when you make the father an unnecessary part of the family unit. Deal with it
Sometimes it doesn't work that way. The mother of my son's child had custody for some years. He paid his child support every month without fail. In March 2009 my son was given sole custody (due to false allegations by the mother). Since then Sandra Webb-Campbell has not paid a penny in child support. She moved out of state; has not used any of her visitation, but complains to the court that she doesn't see her child enough.