attorney or party without attorney …storage.googleapis.com/wzukusers/user-19446454... · request...

FL-300

REQUEST FOR ORDER MODIFICATIONVisitation

Temporary Emergency Court OrderChild Custody

Child Support Spousal Support Other (specify):Attorney Fees and Costs

1. TO (name):

2. A hearing on this Request for Order will be held as follows: If child custody or visitation is an issue in this proceeding, Family Code section 3170 requires mediation before or at the same time as the hearing (see item 7.)

Time: Room.:Dept.:a. Date:

b. Address of court other (specify):same as noted above

3. Attachments to be served with this Request for Order:a. A blank Responsive Declaration (form FL-320) c.

Completed Income and Expense Declaration (form FL-150) and a blank Income and Expense Declaration

b.d.e.

Completed Financial Statement (Simplified) (form FL-155) and a blank Financial Statement (Simplified)

Date:

(TYPE OR PRINT NAME) (SIGNATURE)

COURT ORDER

5. Time for hearing is shortened. Service must be on or before (date):service6. Any responsive declaration must be served on or before (date):7. The parties are ordered to attend mandatory custody services as follows:

Date:JUDICIAL OFFICER

of 4Form Adopted for Mandatory Use

Judicial Council of California FL-300 [Rev. July 1, 2012] Government Code, § 26826

REQUEST FOR ORDER

Points and authorities Other (specify):

www.courts.ca.gov

ATTORNEY OR PARTY WITHOUT ATTORNEY (Name, State Bar number, and address):

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF

TELEPHONE NO.:

E-MAIL ADDRESS (Optional):

ATTORNEY FOR (Name):

STREET ADDRESS:MAILING ADDRESS:

CITY AND ZIP CODE:BRANCH NAME:

PETITIONER/PLAINTIFF:RESPONDENT/DEFENDANT:

FAX NO. (Optional):

FOR COURT USE ONLY

CASE NUMBER:

To the person who received this Request for Order: If you wish to respond to this Request for Order, you must file a Responsive Declaration to Request for Order (form FL-320) and serve a copy on the other parties at least nine court days before the hearing date unless the court has ordered a shorter period of time. You do not have to pay a filing fee to file the Responsive Declaration to Request for Order (form FL-320) or any other declaration including an Income and Expense Declaration (form FL-150) or Financial Statement (Simplified) (form FL-155).

8. You are ordered to comply with the Temporary Emergency Court Orders (form FL-305) attached.

Family Code, §§ 2045, 2107, 6224, 6226, 6320–6326, 6380–6383

OTHER PARENT/PARTY:

4. YOU ARE ORDERED TO APPEAR IN COURT AT THE DATE AND TIME LISTED IN ITEM 2 TO GIVE ANY LEGAL REASON WHY THE ORDERS REQUESTED SHOULD NOT BE GRANTED.

9. Other (specify):

NICOLAS EROS DE FIORI14518 SHAWNEE STREETMOORPARK CA 93021

805-791-9041

NEVADA10075 LEVONE AVE. #107SAMETRUCKEE CA 96161TRUCKEE

KATHERINE ESTEL DE FIORINICOLAS EROS DE FIORI

TFL14-5767

Ex parte to continue trial dateKatherine Estel De Fiori

May 20, 2016 1:15PM B

May 20, 2016NICOLAS EROS DE FIORI

http://www.courts.ca.gov

REQUEST FOR ORDER AND SUPPORTING DECLARATIONOther Parent/Party requests the following orders:Petitioner Respondent

To be ordered pending the hearingCHILD CUSTODY1.

e. Modify existing order

a. Child's name and age

(1) filed on (date):(2) ordering (specify):

To be ordered pending the hearingCHILD VISITATION (PARENTING TIME)2.

a. As requested in: Child Custody and Visitation Application Attachment (form FL-311)

3. CHILD SUPPORT (An earnings assignment order may be issued.)

Modify existing order

c. Monthly amount requested (if not by guideline) $

a. Child's name and age

d.(1) filed on (date):(2) ordering (specify):

FL-300

of 4

b. Legal custody to (name of person who c. Physical custody to (name of makes decisions about health, education, etc.) person with whom child will live)

d. As requested in form Child Custody and Visitation Application Attachment (form FL-311) Request for Child Abduction Prevention Orders (form FL-312)

(2)Attachment 2a(1)

Children's Holiday Schedule Attachment (form FL-341(C))Additional Provisions—Physical Custody Attachment (form FL-341(D))Joint Legal Custody Attachment (form FL-341(E))

Other (specify):(3)

c. One or more domestic violence restraining/protective orders are now in effect. (Attach a copy of the orders if you have one.) The orders are from the following court or courts (specify county and state):

Modify existing orderb.(1) filed on (date):(2) ordering (specify):

(1) Criminal: County/state: Case No. (if known):

(3) Juvenile: County/state: Case No. (if known):

(2) Family: County/state: Case No. (if known):

(4) Other: County/state: Case No. (if known):

PETITIONER/PLAINTIFF: CASE NUMBER:

RESPONDENT/DEFENDANT:

Notice: The court is required to order child support based on the income of both parents. It normally continues until the child is 18. You must supply the court with information about your finances by filing an Income and Expense Declaration(form FL-150) or a Financial Statement (Simplified) (form FL-155). Otherwise, the child support order will be based on information about your income that the court receives from other sources, including the other parent.

FL-300 [Rev. July 1, 2012] REQUEST FOR ORDER

OTHER PARENT/PARTY:

b. I request support based on the child support guidelines

Other (Attachment 1d)

KATHERINE ESTEL DE FIORINICOLAS EROS DE FIORI TFL14-5767

of 4FL-300 [Rev. July 1, 2012]

FL-300PETITIONER/PLAINTIFF: CASE NUMBER:


REQUEST FOR ORDER

OTHER PARENT/PARTY:

4. SPOUSAL OR PARTNER SUPPORT (An earnings assignment order may be issued.)Modify existing orderc.Amount requested (monthly): $a.(1) filed on (date):Terminate existing orderb.(2) ordering (specify):(1) filed on (date):

(2) ordering (specify):

To be ordered pending the hearingPROPERTY CONTROLThe petitioner respondent is given the exclusive temporary use, possession, and control of the followinga.property that we own or are buying (specify):

The petitioner respondent is ordered to make the following payments on liens and encumbrances comingb.due while the order is in effect:

Amount of payment Pay toDebt

7.

Both parties are restrained and enjoined from cashing, borrowing against, canceling, transferring, disposing of, or changing the beneficiaries of any insurance or other coverage, including life, health, automobile, and disability, held for the benefit of the parties or their minor children.

b.

Neither party may incur any debts or liabilities for which the other may be held responsible, other than in the ordinary course of business or for the necessities of life.

c.

6. To be ordered pending the hearingPROPERTY RESTRAINTclaimant is restrained from transferring, encumbering, hypothecating,respondentpetitionerThe

concealing, or in any way disposing of any property, real or personal, whether community, quasi-community, or separate, except in the usual course of business or for the necessities of life.

a.

The applicant will be notified at least five business days before any proposed extraordinary expenditures, and an accounting of such will be made to the court.

5. ATTORNEY FEES AND COSTS are requested on Request for Attorney Fees and Costs Order Attachment (form FL-319) or a declaration that addresses the factors covered in that form. An Income and Expense Declaration (form FL-150) must be attached. A Supporting Declaration for Attorney Fees and Costs Order Attachment (form FL-158) or a declaration that addresses the factors covered in that form must also be attached.

OTHER RELIEF (specify):8.

NOTE: To obtain domestic violence restraining orders, you must use the forms Request for Order (Domestic Violence Prevention) (form DV-100), Temporary Restraining Order (Domestic Violence) (form DV-110), and Notice of Court Hearing (Domestic Violence) (form DV-109).

The Spousal or Partner Support Declaration Attachment (form FL-157) is attached (for modification of spousal or partner support after judgment only)

d.

An Income and Expense Declaration (form FL-150) must be attachede.


Ex Parte orders to continue trial and reopen discovery

10. FACTS IN SUPPORT of orders requested and change of circumstances for any modification are (specify):Contained in the attached declaration. (You may use Attached Declaration (form MC-031) for this purpose.

I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct.Date:

of 4FL-300 [Rev. July 1, 2012]

(SIGNATURE OF APPLICANT)(TYPE OR PRINT NAME)

FL-300PETITIONER/PLAINTIFF: CASE NUMBER:


REQUEST FOR ORDER

The attached declaration must not exceed 10 pages in length unless permission to file a longer declaration has been obtained from the court.)

OTHER PARENT/PARTY:

Requests for AccommodationsAssistive listening systems, computer-assisted real-time captioning, or sign language interpreter services are available if you ask at least five days before the proceeding. Contact the clerk’s office or go to www.courts.ca.gov/forms for Request for Accommodations by Persons With Disabilities and Response (form MC-410). (Civil Code, § 54.8.)

I request that time for service of the Request for Order and accompanying papers be shortened so that these documents may days before the time set for the hearing. I need to have thisbe served no less than (specify number):

order shortening time because of the facts specified in item 10 or the attached declaration.

9.


Orders to continue trial and reopen discovery. See attached:

NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION TO CONTINUE TRIAL AND REOPEN DISCOVERY, POINTS ANDAUTHORITIES, DECLARATION OF NICOLAS EROS DE FIORI AND PROPOSED ORDER THEREON ANDEXHIBITS A, B, C AND D

03/28/2016

NICOLAS EROS DE FIORI

http://www.courts.ca.gov/forms

EX PARTE APPLICATION TO CONTINUE TRIAL AND REOPEN DISCOVERY Marriage of De Fiori, Katherine Estel and Nicolas Eros

CASE NO.: TFI14-5767 Page 1 of 10

123456789

10111213141516171819202122232425262728

NICOLAS EROS DE FIORI 14518 Shawnee Street Moorpark, California 93021 TEL: (805) 791-9041 Attorney in Pro Per

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

COUNTY OF NEVADA, TRUCKEE BRANCH

IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF: ) ) PETITIONER: ) KATHERINE ESTEL DE FIORI ) ) and ) ) RESPONDENT: ) NICOLAS EROS DE FIORI ) ) ) ) )

) CASE NO.: TFL14-5767 NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION TO CONTINUE TRIAL AND REOPEN DISCOVERY, POINTS AND AUTHORITIES, DECLARATION OF NICOLAS EROS DE FIORI AND PROPOSED ORDER THEREON Assigned to: Yvette Durant, Commissioner Trial Date: June 13, 2016

To Petitioner, KATHERINE ESTEL DE FIORI, in pro per

NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that on May 20, 2016 at 1:15PM in Department B

of the Truckee Branch of the Superior Court of California for the County of Nevada located

at 10075 Levon Avenue, #107, Truckee CA 96161, Respondent, NICOLAS EROS

DE FIORI will, and hereby does, move for an order continuing the trial date to as soon as



123456789

10111213141516171819202122232425262728

practicable after August 31, 2016 and reopening of discovery until 30 days prior to the new

trial date. NOTE: This may change. Sufficient time is needed to ensure discovery is

completed and the declarations of disclosures requirement are complied with by both

parties, including time to compel compliance, due to the Petitioner’s chronic bad faith,

fraudulent behavior and lack of cooperation.

The motion is made on the grounds that: (1) The court did not grant a sufficient

enough continuance of the trail date as the Respondent requested in his first motion and

was silent reopening discovery in the Respondent’s first request to do so, (3) the Petitioner

failed to update her mailing address with the court and refused to provide the Respondent

with her new mailing address until after final declarations of disclosures and a motion to

compel responses to interrogatories had been served and returned, (4) additional time is

needed to seek legal advice and request that a stipulated personal property judgment be set

aside.

The motion will be based on this notice of motion, on the declaration of NICOLAS

EROS DE FIORI, and the supporting memorandum served and filed herewith, on the

records and file herein, and on such evidence as may be presented at the hearing of the

motion.

Dated:

By Nicolas Eros De Fiori, in pro per

PARTIES

Katherine Estel De Fiori, Petitioner Nicolas Eros De Fiori

18717 Mill Villa Road #154 (mailing) 14518 Shawnee Street (mailing & physical)

Jamestown CA 95327 Moorpark, CA 93021

(530) 414-4760 (805) 791-9041



123456789

10111213141516171819202122232425262728

DECLARATION RE: NOTICE UPON

EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR ORDERS

Pursuant to California Rules of Court I, Nicolas Eros De Fiori, Respondent, have

given notice of this application for ex parte orders to Katherine Estel De Fiori, Petitioner.

I gave notice to the Petitioner in the following manner:

1. By telephone call to (530) 414-4760: May 13, 2016 at 2:38PM. Left

voicemail. No response received.

2. By text to (530) 414-4760: May 13, 2016 at 2:36PM. No response.

I notified the Petitioner that I was requesting orders to reopen discovery and

continue the trial date from June 13, 2016 to, tentatively, a date as soon as practicable

after August 31, 2016 to allow for sufficient time to obtain legal advice, review DCSS

child support calculations and serve, file and hear discovery motions. The hearing will be

held in Department B of the Superior Court of Nevada County located at 10075 Levine

Avenue, Suite 107, Truckee California 96161. The need to continue the trial date was to

allow sufficient time to obtain legal advice, hear discovery related motions and prepare

for trial. I also informed the Petitioner that the length of the continuance was unknown at

this time and will depend on the Petitioner’s cooperation or lack thereof. I do not expect

opposition from the Petitioner.

I declare under penalties of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the

forgoing is true, accurate and complete.

DATED:

Nicolas Eros De Fiori, Respondent



123456789

10111213141516171819202122232425262728

EXHIBIT A

PETITIONER TRANSPORTATION PROBLEMS

Marriage of De Fiori Case No.: TFL14-5767

Ex Parte Motion to Continue Trial Date

On Friday, May 6, 2016, the Petitioner left e a voice mail and text me asking that dates of

upcoming hearings and ask if I can provide transportation for her to get to the hearing.

Via text and email I provided the Petitioner with the upcoming court appearance dates and

declined the Petitioner’s request to provide transportation. I instead asked the Petitioner to tell

me what dates she be in court and I will prepare a stipulation and filing to motion the court to

continue the hearing and related dates on both of our behalves.

Since time is of essence I asked the Petitioner to get back to me by Monday, May 9, 2016. I

followed up with a phone call t 10:AM on Monday, May 9, 2016 informing the Petitioner that I

needed her to give me dates that worked from her by 4PM on Monday May 9, 2016. The

Petitioner has contacted me several times since the deadline but has not mentioned her purported

transportation issues or coordinating a different date.

Attached is a copy of the email I sent to the Petitioner on May 6, 2017 at 8:29PM that was also

sent in a serious of texts immediately following starting at 8:30PM.

///

///

///

///



123456789

10111213141516171819202122232425262728

I declare under penalties of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the

forgoing is true, accurate and complete.

DATED:


///

///

///

///

///

///

///

///

///

///

///

///

///

///

///

///

///

///

///

///



123456789

10111213141516171819202122232425262728

EXHIBIT B

OUTLINE OF ISSUES REQUIRING LEGAL ASSISTANCE



This exhibit summarizes the issues that I need legal advice to address. I have already met with a pro bono attorney twice and anticipate the need to meet at least twice more to get answers to all my questions and properly prepare for trial *****************************************************************************

QUESTIONS FOR PRO BONO ATTORNEY CONEJO FREE CLINIC

(May 10, 2016)


1. DECLARATION OF DISCLOSURES

• Background o Preliminary declarations of disclosures

§ Petitioner failed to comply, § I complied but judge indicted, not ruled I failed also.

o Final declarations § Petitioner has made no effort to comply, § Petitioner has intentionally avoided service twic casing me to fail to

comply. o Trial and related dates were continued. Request to reopen discovery ignored.

§ Order changed final declaration due date to 45 days prior to new trial date. § Statute states final declarations are due 45 days prior to first trial date.

• Questions 1. Can valid declarations be served and filed 45 days prior to the new trial date?

/// ///



123456789

10111213141516171819202122232425262728

2. MAILING ADDRESS/AVOIDANCE OF DISCOVERY

• Background o Without reason or cause, the Petitioner refuses to give me her residence

(voluntarily and though discover) address and the judge allows it, o Petitioner keeps moving (half a dozen times at least in the past 1-1/2 years) and

fails/refuses to timely provide me or the court with her new mailing address so as to avoid any hearing or order that would require her to disclose or validate income.

o Petitioner moved again in April and did not update her mailing address as I reminded her she was required to do which she never did as required by law.

o I called court prior to serving to confirm address not changed as instructed in open court by the judge on June 1.

o The judge permitting this is clearly not in my children’s best interests, • Questions

o What can I ask judge to do on her own motion for Petitioner’s obvious avoidance of having to serve discovery (twice now on final declarations)?

o $50 and $75 sanctions do nothing to nobody and Petitioner is avoiding orders to compel.

3. FINDINGS AND ORDERS AFTER HEARING

• Background

o Only after I served and got returned (served on 4/16 and just got returned yesterday) a propose order to compel responses to interrogatories did Petitioner provide her new mailing address.

o The amended final declarations I served will also be returned. o Thus the Petitioner continues to intentionally avoid mandated discovery (I am

confident in hopes I will stipulate waiver at trial that I am not going to do) • Questions

1. Time to serve OAH has passed. Local Rules permit 30 days. Is there any reason I can’t motion the court for additional time to serve the OAH?

2. Can I motion to re-serve the financial declarations? 3. What happens if a court ordered OAH is not filed by trial?

/// /// /// ///



123456789

10111213141516171819202122232425262728

4. STIPULATED PROPERTY JUDGMENT (bifurcated) • Background

o The date to submit the judgment for entry has passed. Local Rule provide 30 days. o I will be asking the judgment be set aside. o If it is not set aside, I will be appealing it.

• Questions 1. Can I have the judgment entered now? 2. Will entering the judgment late (with the final judgment at trial) impact anything? 3. If I enter it now do I need to file two appeals (bifurcated and final judgment)? 4. What happens if I do not enter the judgment before trial?

5. CONTINUE TRIAL DATE • Background

o First requested be continued to after June 30 and to reopen discovery o Judge only gave to June 13 and ignored reopening discovery o Dates: § MSC: June 3, Pre-Trial: June 6, Trial: June 13 § Discovery closed § Discovery motions last day 15 days prior to trial § Final Declarations 45 days prior to new trial date

• Questions o Valid reasons for second continuance and reopen discovery? § The court did not grant a sufficient enough continuance first time § court was silent on the Respondent’s first request to reopen discovery, § Additional discovery needed to verify the Petitioner’s income that the court

has found to be zero based solely on Petitioner’s verbal statements and blank preliminary disclosures

§ Court ignored previously requested income and expense statements for prior periods,

§ Petitioner keeps avoiding service of discovery related filings/documents, § additional time is needed to request that a stipulated personal property

judgment using surprise, dishonesty and coercion under duress prior to trial o Can trail be taken off calendar and restarted? Pros and Cons? o Can I just have the trail date and reopen discovery continued (not MSC or Pre-

trial)? o Is it common to have MSC and Pre-trial so close? Pro’s and con’s?



123456789

10111213141516171819202122232425262728

6. REOPEN DISCOVERY • Background

o Discovery to share accurate and honest financial information is the most important aspect of a divorce,

o Petitioner’s income is critical. She is CLEARLY lying. o Judge/DCSS has NO basis for her finding that Petitioner has no income except

verbal statements and blank preliminaries, o Judge ignored request for order to verify income (prior 150’s) and final

declarations not complied with. o NO meaningful action has yet to be taken by the court that the Petitioner has not

been permitted by the court to circumvent in order to avoid compliance. • Questions

o With DCSS in picture and considering what has gone on in court and with DCSS? o Is there anything that precludes me for requesting the following discovery? § Serve OAH to compel responses to interrogatories (after getting extension) § File contempt if no response. § Comply with final declarations requirements.

o Can the Petitioner be ordered to sign joint tax returns as we have always done? 7. CHILD SUPPORT

• Background

o The DCSS and judge are very obviously trying to keep the Petitioners child support at around $350 which: § ignores facts and is not based upon verified income (or lack thereof), § is not in our children’s bests interests or meet our children’s needs, § not in accordance with guidelines or the spirit of the law.

• Questions 1. What could be magical about a $350/month child support amount? I theorize that

above $350 (i.e. at imputed income of full time employment at minimum wage) would indicate an income in excess of the threshold to file an income tax return requiring disclosure of the Petitioner’s source of income.

2. Are there any other possible reason it is desirable for the Petitioner’s child support to stay around $350/month?

3. Can **I** request new seek work order be requested? /// ///



123456789

10111213141516171819202122232425262728

8. APPEAL/JUDGMENT

• Background o In clear collusion with the judge, the Petitioner has been using the very common

litigation tactics of “Litigation by numbers” and “Delay, delay, delay” to avoid having to disclose, justify or report income. A coerced personal property settlement was also clearly coordinated and designed to provide the Petitioner with an offset to avoid justifying income to pay joint debit.

o Without hearing any argument or presentation of facts, the judge has already prejudicially tried to set the stage for finding that money that was clearly loaned by my father are not loans obviously also so the Petitioner would not carry any risk due to community debt

o Without reason or cause the Petitioner refuses to sign 2013 and 2014 tax returns obviously so I have to file married single which would prevent her from carrying any individual tac liability with the FTB or IRS.

o The Petitioner has already made it clear she seeks a judgment without providing discovery in collusion with the judge.

o I am concerned that I am being set up so the judgment will not be appealable • Questions

o How do final declarations fact into getting judgments? My understanding is they are required first.

o How do preliminary declarations fact into getting a judgement? o Having some background on this case, on what technicalities could Durant/the

Petitioner be desiring to use to deny me an appeal on technicalities? Barring another plausible explanation that nobody is volunteering, the Petitioner being a sex worker protected by the Truckee PD Truckee Brach of the Nevada County Superior Court has now become obscenely obvious to me. I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the forgoing true,

accurate and correct and if called to testify I could do so competently.

DATE:




123456789

10111213141516171819202122232425262728

EXHIBIT C

WAIVER OF SHERIFF NOTICE FEES



In my renewal court fee waiver application I requested a waiver of the sheriff’s fee to

give notice (I was granted the waiver in my initial fee waiver application) based on: (1)

the Petitioner refuses to give me her residence address without reason or authoritative

good cause provided to or requested by the court, (2) the Petitioner will only allow

herself to be served by the sheriff at the sheriff’s office, (3) the Petitioner has chronically

avoided mail service and refuses to agree to being served electronically, (4) I live 500

miles from Nevada County creating a time impediment to serve the Petitioner by mail,

and (5) I am receiving CalFresh, Medi-Cal and exempted Cash Aid and it is an extreme

financial hardship for me to bare the cost of the sheriff's fee to give notice.

Commissioner Yvette Durant granted all requested fee waivers except the sheriff’s fee to

give notice stating it was the Petitioner’s problem, not mine, if she refused to accept mail

service. The Commissioner further stated that I did not need to have the Petitioner

personally served in order to complete the divorce process with or without the

Petitioner’s cooperation; the process can be completed using mail service only. The

Commissioner did not address my other reasons for my request.

When I attempted to argue my other reasons Commissioner Durant interrupted me stating

that I was obsessed with personally serving the Petitioner and that the court could not

waive fees for a private company to personally serve the Petitioner. I replied stating I am



123456789

10111213141516171819202122232425262728

not asking for a private company to waive its fees, I am requesting waiver of the sheriff’s

fee to give notice. The Commissioner then stated that the sheriff only serves DVRO’s to

which I replied that the sheriff has served motions for me in the past. Commissioner did

not respond to me correcting her and instead told me that she was not going to discuss

this with me again which ended the hearing.

Note that in addition not granting me the waiver of the sheriff notice fee prejudicing me

by creating a time impediment to serve motions, due to my extreme financial hardship,

not granting me the waiver prejudices my ability to:

motion for contempt that requires personal service (and is needed), and prejudices service of child supports orders that also require personal service.

I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the forgoing

true, accurate and correct and if called to testify I could do so competently.

DATE:



CASE NO.: TFI14-5767

123456789

10111213141516171819202122232425262728

EXHIBIT D

COMMINCATIONS WITH DCSS


Ex Parte Motion to Continue Trial Date On Wednesday, May 4, 2016, I called to speak to Natasha E. Oliphant, Child Support Services

Specialist with the Ventura County Department of Child Support Services (the “DCSS”), to

discuss me reviewing the DCSS’s calculation of the child support amount payable by the

Petitioner as the noncustodial parent.

Attached is a letter dated May 5, 2016 memorializing our conversation that also expresses my

concerns regarding statements, findings and orders made by the Court and the DCSS.

On Friday, May 6, 2016 I followed up with the attached facsimile sharing my plausible beliefs as

to how and why the child support amounts calculated by the Court and by the Nevada County

DCSS were similar and below the State guideline amount.

Lastly, attached is a letter dated May 11, 2016 I sent Ms. Oliphant in response to the complaint

filed against the Petitioner for child support (Form FL-600), again expressing my concerns about

DCSS’s actions and calculations.

I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the forgoing

true, accurate and correct and if called to testify I could do so competently.

DATE:


NICOLAS E. DE FIORI 14518 Shawnee Street ⬝ Moorpark California 93021

(805) 791-9041 ⬝ [email protected]

May 5, 2016 VIA FAX AND FIRST CLASS MAIL Ms. Natasha E. Oliphant Child Support Services Specialist Ventura County Department of Child Support Services 5171 Verdugo Way Camarillo, California 93012

De Fiori vs. De Fiori Re: CSE Case No. 200000001599593 Dear Ms. Oliphant: When we spoke yesterday you informed me that only the noncustodial parent is given an opportunity to review and comment on the child support amount calculated by the Ventura County Department of Child Support Services. Upon review of information I received from the Nevada County DCSS last summer, your statement appears to be incorrect. I also want to provide you with additional information regarding what has transpired in court and previously with the NC DCSS in regards to child support. First, the NC DCSS gave me the opportunity to review and stipulate agreement to a child support amount they calculated in July 2015. I was told that if I did not agree I should state my reasons and attend the hearing to argue my concerns before the court. Why would the VC DCSS do any different? I did not agree with the amount. The NC DCSS prepared a stipulated judgment for me to sign stating that under penalties of perjury “the amount calculated under guideline is $361.” As shown in the table below for the 2015 tax year, based upon my calculations and understanding of the law, I do not believe that guideline amount is correct. Being a layman in this area, I could very obviously be wrong, so I asked the NC DCSS to provide me with the basis used determined Ms. De Fiori’s income (i.e. did Ms. De Fiori provide verifiable pay history that was reasonable for the DCSS to use under law?) which was not received.

Monthly Net Basic Child Disposable Income Support Amount NC DCSS $1,196 $361 to $478 Min. Wage @ 40 hrs/week $1,3511/ $443 to $519

1/ Monthly taxable income = ($9/hour × 40 hours × 52 weeks) ÷ 12 = $1,560

mailto:[email protected]

14518 Shawnee Street ⬝ Moorpark California 93021 ⬝ (805) 791-9041 ⬝ [email protected]

Ms. Natasha E. Oliphant May 5, 2016 Page Two By coincidence, Commissioner Durant used an arbitrary approach in order to arrive at a similar amount of $350/month that she stated met my children’s needs. I do not believe Commissioner Durant’s determination that $350/month meets my children’s needs and is within reasonable judicial discretion or based in facts that Commissioner subjugated and/or ignored, including a comprehensive analysis substantiating Ms. De Fiori’s true earning capacity of $35K. My primary concern is that I do not believe due diligence or proper applicable of law is being used by either DCSS or Commissioner Durant in “calculation” of guideline child support for my children which, based upon the surrounding circumstances, makes me exterermly suspicions about what is really going on and why. As a side note, the Nevada County DCSS should not have even filed a complaint to begin with as they did so after I stopped receiving cash aid. It took weeks and numerous unreturned phone calls and unreplied emails to Nevada County HSA and DCSS, and me having to also raise my concerns to the supervisor level, in order to get the DCSS to file a motion to dimiss its compliant. Lastly, and please pardon the accusatory tone, but you even told me that the DCSS could use part-time employment when I mentioned that 40 hours a week is statutorily required if reliable income history is not available. How is it possible to vary from a statute requiring DCSS use 40 hours a week that, as far as I am aware, does not allow for discretion or provide for any exceptions? I could very well be missing something and will stand to be corrected if I’m wrong. I am confident you are starting to understand why I am extremely concerned about the California Department of Child Support Services’ impartiality and adherence to its mandate to put the best interest of my children first, not Ms. De Fiori’s. As you know, I have compelling and continually accumulating evidence Ms. De Fiori is a sex worker being protected by government corruption which is why I copied the Ventura County District Attorney on my first letter and am doing so on this letter also. Ms. Oliphant, the purpose of the DCSS and a family law judge is to protect families and children. Neither has been the case for me and my family, including my ex-wife who Commissioner Durant allowed to continue drinking when the court record clearly showed that doing so was not in my children’s or their mother’s best interests; however, it was obviously in somebody else’s.



Ms. Natasha E. Oliphant May 5, 2016 Page Three My boys are deeply hurt, emotionally damaged for life and are suffering dearly after living in toxic turmoil for years due to their serially unfaithful alcoholic mother who then completely abandoned her children to go off and have fun living a carefree single’s life as an admitted sex worker leaving me stripped of any means to support our children and a huge mess to try and clean up. To top it off, I am now having to spend all my time battling a corrupt family court and the DCSS in order to get just child support resulting in my innocent children being further victimized. My patience has run out. It seems that due to my sons’ alcoholic mother deciding to become a sex worker protected by the Truckee Police Department (Ms. De Fiori recently even told me that “They [Truckee PD] protect me.”), my sons and I have somehow become an excluded class not entitled to due process and the same level of protection and services enjoyed by other citizens in this country. And this is all just the tip of the iceberg and only includes the shenanigans in court and at the DCSS. There’s much, much more. What’s really going on has become obscenely obvious to me. Please be aware that if all that is now occurring continues, I will be having this entire situation investigated to determine if there is sufficient evidence to file a civil lawsuit and/or request criminal charges be filed against all parties involved. If the evidence is not then sufficient and this doesn’t soon stop, I am confident it later will be. Please call me at (805) 791-9041and leave me a voice mail with a time and date for us to speak tomorrow or early next week. Sincerely,

Nicolas E. De Fiori cc: Mr. Gregory D. Totten, Ventura County District Attorney Mr. Tim Yuss; Supervising Child Support Services Specialist

Superior Court for the State of California, County of Nevada Ms. Katherine Estel De Fiori, Noncustodial Parent


14518 Shawnee Street Moorpark, CA 93021 (805) 791-9041 (805) 529-0077 (call first)

NICOLAS E. DE FIORI

Fax URGENT & IMPORTANT

To: Ms. Natasha E. Oliphant From: Nicolas E. De Fiori

Fax: 805-437-8308 Pages: 1 (Incl. Cover)

Phone: 866-901-3212 Date: 05/06/16

Re: CSE Case No. 200000001599593 cc:

Mr. Gregory D. Totten, Ventura County District Attorney

Since I wrote my letter that I mailed to you yesterday (I will not be faxing it as the letter indicates), I believe I may have come up with a very plausible reason why:

1. Ms. De Fiori has made it nearly impossible for me to get a judgment with final orders, 2. Durant has participated in Ms. De Fiori’s efforts ignoring facts and obscenely abusing

her discretion, 3. NC NV DCSS filed a complaint after I stopped receiving cash aid, 4. NC NV DCSS did not use the statutorily minimum wage and 40 hours per week, 5. NC NV SS asked me to stipulate to their child support amount, 6. You stated you would use part-time employment and have been cagey, 7. Ms. De Fiori recently told me she was marrying her BF, and 8. A whole host of other things have occurred that I will not go into, Ms. De Fiori being required to pay child support at the guideline amount (i.e. full time employment at minimum wage) would require an income level that far exceeds the threshold to file a tax return on a single tax payer in 2016, and just over the threshold for married filing jointly; thus requiring her to file a tax return. Therein lies the problem.. If you file tax return you are required to disclosed your source of income and, as a sex worker who, even by Ms. De Fiori’s own admission, is protected by the Truckee Police Department, that is something Ms. De Fiori cannot do. Very plausible, especially when considered in combination with everything else.

NICOLAS E. DE FIORI 14518 Shawnee Street ⬝ Moorpark California 93021

(805) 791-9041 ⬝ [email protected]

VIA FAX AND May 11, 2016 FIRST CLASS MAIL MS. Natasha E. Oliphant Child Support Services Specialist Ventura County Department of Child Support Services 5171 Verdugo Way Camarillo, California 93012 Re: CSE Case No. 200000001599593 Dear Ms. Oliphant: I hereby acknowledge receipt in the mail today, May 11, 2016 of the FL-600 that the DCSS filed against Ms. Katherine E. De Fiori sent under cover of a letter dated May 3, 2016 requesting that I immediately respond with any information I have regarding Ms. De Fiori’s pay history. I quickly reviewed the calculation of the child support amount and have a few questions (see below). I will do a more in-depth review and provide you with my final response no later than 5PM on Wednesday May 19, 2016. I unfortunately cannot respond sooner due to critical court filings I need to prepare and file as a result of Ms. De Fiori’s continued bad faith and violations of law in order to avoid of discovery. Note that I will be requesting the DCSS subpoena the Resort at Squaw Creek requesting Ms. De Fiori’s 2013 and 2014 W-2’s and pay stubs where she consistently earned an average of $14 to $16 per hour and worked 30 to 35 hours per week result in a recent pay history of from $1,820 to $2,427 per month/ This amount is still significantly below Ms. De Fiori’s true earnings capacity of approximately $2,900 per month that I prepared a comprehensive analysis to demonstrate for my motion for child support that was heard on January 11, 2016. I will include a copy of my analysis for your review. Following are my initial questions:

1. On what verified basis is Ms. De Fiori’s income known? Ignoring Ms. De Fiori’s true earnings capacity of $35K annually, as demonstrated above Ms. De Fiori’s most recent pay history ranges from $1,820 to $2,427 (obviously needs to also be verified by W-2’s AND pay stubs).

2. Why didn’t the Nevada County DCSS use the same income? Ms. De Fiori asserts unemployment and has avoided proving any discovery to the court or me.



Ms. Natasha E. Oliphant May 11, 2016 Page Two

1. $1,560 is still below minimum wage at 40 hours per week. Is that income reasonable and on what basis does it produce a child support that meets my children’s needs?

2. What precludes Ms. De Fiori from obtaining full time employment at minimum wage? 3. Why didn’t DCSS impute minimum wage at 40 hours per week? 4. Why is DCSS now able to provide me with its calculation to review when you previously told

me that only Ms. De Fiori will be reviewing the calculations?

As I mentioned, I will complete my review and provide you with my final response no later than May 19th. In the meantime, due to upcoming trial on June 13th (that I am motioning be continued), I ask that DCSS now prepare a motion to subpoena Ms. De Fiori’s employment records from the Resort at Squaw Creek. Lastly, for your information, due to Ms. De Fiori’s refusal to comply with the declarations of disclosures requirement and very clever tactics (well beyond her faculties) to ensure that my efforts to file disclosures is nullified, neither of us have complied with the disclosure requirements I believe potentially making any support or property order/judgment invalid and unenforceable. I still need to confirm that, and will be taking this up with the court. My continued discoveries further increase my suspicions regarding the impartially of the DCSS and the reasons why DCSS would act in the apparent best interests of Ms. De Fiori and not my children. As such. I am also copying the Ventura County District Attorney on this letter should this accumulate to a criminal investigation which is where this looks to me it could be going. Please do not hesitate contact me at (805) 791-9041 if you have any questions. Sincerely, Nicolas E. De Fiori cc: Ms. Katherine Estel De Fiori Superior Court of California for the County of Nevada


attorney or party without attorney …storage.googleapis.com/wzukusers/user-19446454... · request...

Documents