Not only does she lose her child, but the child is given away to complete strangers the receiving couple met on-line, BEFORE the Judge even gives them the tot!
The mother's lawyer bitches, (Extremely rare) about the case and the Judge and the opposing MORMON lawyers get her dis-barred.
End of story, right? NAH!...
If the Judge, CPS, CASA and the County didn't have the lawyer dis-barred for daring to challenge the Judges Ruling, the story would have died probably along with the tot.
However, with nothing to lose, the lawyer took the tots case to Appeal. Guess who is now going to be dis-barred and have their asses sued off?
RALEIGH –12/28/10 – Last week, the North Carolina Court of Appeals vacated a child custody order entered by Orange County District Court Judge Joe Buckner, calling the child custody case a “charade.” The case involves a 3-year old boy who was removed from Nevada by Mormons so he could be adopted in North Carolina without his mother’s consent.
The Court of Appeals agreed with the young boy’s mother, Emily M. McManaway, that Judge Buckner’s order must be vacated because he failed to hear any evidence before awarding sole custody of McManaway’s son to her brother and his wife when they had already given the young boy away to a Surry County couple they had met online.
Betsy J. Wolfenden, McManaway’s former attorney, was able to stop the illegal adoption of her client’s son, but after the Surry County couple refused to return the child, Wolfenden filed a motion in Orange County District Court to have Judge Buckner’s custody order set aside. The Court of Appeals held that Judge Buckner’s refusal to set aside his custody order was an abuse of discretion when he failed to hold a custody hearing and when the order contained “patently false” findings. The Mormon couples were represented in Orange County District Court by Attorneys Donna Ambler Davis and Leigh A. Peek.
Wolfenden, a UNC law school graduate, was disbarred in July of this year after the North Carolina State Bar accused her of filing “frivolous” lawsuits against Davis and Peek on behalf of McManaway. The State Bar also found that Wolfenden was a danger to the public. “I feel vindicated by the opinion,” says Wolfenden. “I have asserted all along that it is the corruption in Orange County District Court which endangers the public, and I was disbarred for speaking out against it.”
Wolfenden ran for Orange County District Court judge in 2008, claiming the constitutional rights of parents are frequently violated in that court. During the election, Buckner, Davis and Peek brought dozens of anonymous grievances against her with the State Bar. Wolfenden lost the election and Buckner, Davis and Peek later testified against her at her State Bar hearing. Wolfenden is currently suing the State Bar, Buckner, Davis and Peek for malicious prosecution, obstruction of justice, and for conspiring to defame her.
The link to the Court of Appeals’ opinion:
Bohannan v. McManaway
The link to Wolfenden's amended complaint against the North Carolina State Bar:
Wolfenden v. Lunsford Long et al.
The Court of Appeals agreed with the young boy’s mother, Emily M. McManaway, that Judge Buckner’s order must be vacated because he failed to hear any evidence before awarding sole custody of McManaway’s son to her brother and his wife when they had already given the young boy away to a Surry County couple they had met online.
Betsy J. Wolfenden, McManaway’s former attorney, was able to stop the illegal adoption of her client’s son, but after the Surry County couple refused to return the child, Wolfenden filed a motion in Orange County District Court to have Judge Buckner’s custody order set aside. The Court of Appeals held that Judge Buckner’s refusal to set aside his custody order was an abuse of discretion when he failed to hold a custody hearing and when the order contained “patently false” findings. The Mormon couples were represented in Orange County District Court by Attorneys Donna Ambler Davis and Leigh A. Peek.
Wolfenden, a UNC law school graduate, was disbarred in July of this year after the North Carolina State Bar accused her of filing “frivolous” lawsuits against Davis and Peek on behalf of McManaway. The State Bar also found that Wolfenden was a danger to the public. “I feel vindicated by the opinion,” says Wolfenden. “I have asserted all along that it is the corruption in Orange County District Court which endangers the public, and I was disbarred for speaking out against it.”
Wolfenden ran for Orange County District Court judge in 2008, claiming the constitutional rights of parents are frequently violated in that court. During the election, Buckner, Davis and Peek brought dozens of anonymous grievances against her with the State Bar. Wolfenden lost the election and Buckner, Davis and Peek later testified against her at her State Bar hearing. Wolfenden is currently suing the State Bar, Buckner, Davis and Peek for malicious prosecution, obstruction of justice, and for conspiring to defame her.
The link to the Court of Appeals’ opinion:
Bohannan v. McManaway
The link to Wolfenden's amended complaint against the North Carolina State Bar:
Wolfenden v. Lunsford Long et al.
2 comments:
The same day the Court of Appeals issued a strongly-worded opinion calling the Orange County child custody case involving Emily McManaway's son a "charade," it issued a second opinion affirming the dismissal of McManaway's lawsuit against LDS Family Services, Cecil Bohannon, Marvilyn Bohannon, Kristin Bradley Branch, Johnny Lee Branch and Attorneys Donna Ambler Davis and Leigh Peek, on the grounds they had absolute immunity because their misconduct occurred during judicial proceedings. The Court noted that other legal remedies may be available to McManaway against the parties who interfered with custody of her son:
"Because we are reviewing an order granting a motion to dismiss, we have taken all of the allegations of plaintiff's complaint as true. To the extent that they are in fact true, they reveal an appalling scheme to separate a child from his mother by misrepresentations and manipulation of court proceedings. Our conclusion that the trial court properly dismissed the complaint should not be read as an endorsement of defendants' actions. Other legal remedies may be available to plaintiff for these wrongs."
Opinion in McManaway v. LDS Family Services, Inc. et al.:
http://appellate.nccourts.org/opinions/?c=2&pdf=2010/09-889-1.pdf
--
Betsy J. Wolfenden, Executive Director
North Carolina Citizens for Legal Reform
nclegalreform@gmail.com
Then lets hope mom is planning on suiing their balls off.
I would begin with Tortuous Interference.
Post a Comment