English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

property. I was at a pool party thrown by the Condo. Asso. where I live. I drank a beer. I was not drunk, unruly in any way, as a matter of fact had a nice peaceful time. I have nothing legally or otherwise that prevents me from drinking a beer. The party was funded by the dues that each of us to live here. Un-beknown to me, one of my neighbors apparently already knew ABOUT me even though I had never met half of the people at this party. This neighbor, (still not positive which one it was as again these people were all new to me), went to the DFCS worker, who does not live here nor was at this party, and told her she saw me drinking a beer. This DFCS worker went to my attorney 5 days after the party and told him she's coming after me as I had been "spotted" drinking a beer at a party this past weekend. I know I have recourse against the DFCS worker and am pursueing that. Do I have recourse against the Asso./neighbor this as this was done with the intent to harm me and my son

2007-07-14 11:12:33 · 7 answers · asked by Nancy E 2 in Politics & Government Law & Ethics

7 answers

Not enough context. You history may play an important role here.

2007-07-14 11:23:54 · answer #1 · answered by Robert S 6 · 1 0

I guess DFCS is connected with Child Services? Were you allowed to be drinking beer? Because if the worker heard that you'd had a beer, and you're allowed to do that, then there's no problem. So, were you doing something you were not supposed to be doing? These people are looking out for the best interest of your child. Clearly you'd previously done something wrong for this even to be an issue now.

2007-07-14 18:17:13 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

Data bases are used by all sorts of private organizations and government agencies to make decisions about people ... people under investigation, people accused of whatever.

These data bases tend to accumulate data in such a way that there are lots of opportunities for errors to creep in, but very few opportunities for people to notice there are errors and get them fixed.

Let's suppose there is someone else with name similar to yours, who had an alcohol abuse problem ... gets drunk, beats up on family members, abuses kids while drunk ... that can be a common problem that DFCS has to investigate.

Ok, for whatever false phony reason, you are now under their microscope, and a common situation they have to investigate are people who get drunk, then while under the influence of excessive drink, lose self control.

So now you have been "spotted" doing what any adult has a legal right to do ... indulge in alcohol, so long as not end up driving while under the influence, or be out in public in a noticeably inebriated condition.

But depending on the nature of DFCS investigation
Here you are having a beer
and perhaps they think you abuse your kid when you are drunk

Your defense might be that you never abuse your kid
Your defense might be that you never have so much to drink that you lose self control

but how is DFCS to know that?
Someone has told them something that hopefully your attorney can get a list of the allegations
then armed with that & your attorney guidance
you can then take appropriate action to refute those charges one by one

If in fact you had a beer at a party, and someone saw you having it, and told DFCS, there is nothing you can about that witness.

What you can do, is if someone gives damaging info to DFCS that your attorney can prove
* they did in fact give that info (subpoena DFCS records)
* this info is in fact false

then multiple action can be taken against that person
* giving false info to a government investigation ... perjury (spelling?) can apply ... even though the government would normally bring charges for such criminal behavior, the US constitution allows a private individual's attorney to charge a person with a crime, when the individual thinks the government falling down on its responsibilities
* libel slander whatever against your reputation (this is a civil court case matter, where the burden of proof is lower than in a criminal case)
* stalking may apply ... this is where someone following you around trying to cause harm to you ... in which the normal response is a temporary restraining order

2007-07-14 23:06:05 · answer #3 · answered by Al Mac Wheel 7 · 0 0

No, you do not. However, you aren't telling the entire story here either. Why is there a problem with DFCS in the first place? It is clear that you already have a problem with DFCS.

2007-07-14 18:16:19 · answer #4 · answered by cyanne2ak 7 · 2 0

You are not likely to prevail against the neighbor unless you can prove that it was false AND done with malice. That would be abuse of process and maybe slander or libel, depending on the circumstances, but I think that's not likely either, since you said the neighbor reported seeing you with A beer, and one beer is what you've admitted here.

2007-07-14 18:22:57 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

If you have a background history of alcoholism, CPS (or DFCS) will use even one beer as evidence that you are backsliding and are unfit to be a parent. If you are not an alcoholic or a drug addict, then it is none of their business.

2007-07-14 22:29:09 · answer #6 · answered by Brigid O' Somebody 7 · 0 0

If there was nothing legally preventing you from drinking, and no harm resulted from drinking, then there is nothing you can be legally charged with.

Assuming you prevail in any legal action against you, you can sue the person who filed the complaint with DFCS.

Laws vary by state. Check your local listings, or consult with an attorney licensed in your state.

2007-07-14 18:16:45 · answer #7 · answered by coragryph 7 · 1 1

fedest.com, questions and answers