Why Law Firms, Judge Claudia Silbar and ex-husband KNEW or SHOULD HAVE KNOWN they were AND STILL ARE violating the Law

This is not legal advice, just my understanding:

1-MARK F. HASSMAN, the ex-husband who is a CPA, Harvard Business School Graduate and a Chief Financial Officer;

The Law Firms which guided and represented the spouses for their divorce and/or spousal support modifications:
2-SEASTROM & SEASTROM;
3-ALAN SHIFMAN of the Law Offices of ALAN SHIFMAN and he is also a CPA;
4-KALEEN GONZALEZ of the law firm The Offices of HARRIS GONZALEZ

and
5- JUDGE CLAUDIA SILBAR

all of them KNEW OR SHOULD HAVE KNOWN that:

1) “NAMCO;”

2)“ Husbands 401(k) plan;”

3) “Moote Pointe Partners, LLC;”

4) “Moote Pointe X, LLC;”

5)“the health and long term care insurance;”

6) “insurance trusts;

7)“Metlife Annuity”

and other assets disclosed on the Stipulated Judgment and on the Declarations of Disclosure, were not lawfully disclosed because they lacked
SUFFICIENT PARTICULARITY.

I was in a state of emotional abuse and emotional torture, in therapy and taking medication. I was trying to learn to cope with the sudden loss of my relationships with my Children; the Parental Alienation which is well documented, even in a letter ALAN SHIFMAN of the Law Offices of ALAN SHIFMAN sent to some of these others.

Think they tried to take advantage of me?

JUDGE CLAUDIA SILBAR reviewed, signed and filed said stipulated judgment as the document shows which is part of the case file in public records and discussed in her public courtroom.

To review the court file: case #09D002792, Superior Court of California, County of Orange; Lamoreaux Justice Center.

You can also order the transcripts from the court reporter Steve Pay at (657) 622-5137. Judge Claudia Silbar’s courtroom is L11.

It is my understanding not legal advice:
JUDGE CLAUDIA SILBAR knew or should have known the asset descriptions listed above which appear on the stipulated judgment are insufficient assets descriptions for many reasons because their name, material information like their value and other material information is missing from this legal divorce judgment.

MARK F. HASSMAN, the ex-husband who is a Certified Public Accountant, received his MBA from Harvard; is a Chief Financial Officer who spearheaded the Jiffy Lube initial public offering and has negotiated many multi-million dollar agreements; he too knew or should have known material information like the values of these assets and their exact names must be listed on a legal agreement like the judgment so that they can be reasonably identified by a person of ordinary intelligence.

The Family Law Firms guiding and representing MRS. HASSMAN and MR. HASSMAN during the dissolution of marriage process and for post judgment spousal support requests made on behalf of MR. HASSMAN due to his deteriorating financial situation and more currently his “insolvency,” and Judge Claudia Silbar also; knew or should have known as the stipulated judgment shows;

MR. HASSMAN, was “TAKING UNFAIR ADVANTAGE” OF MRS. HASSMAN who was in a state of emotional abuse and trauma.
Here is another example:

MR. HASSMAN signed “under the penalty of perjury” a document showing that: although he was requesting to reduce his spousal support obligation he was ordered to pay MRS. HASSMAN due to his deteriorating financial situation which he was granted by Judge Claudia Silbar; he could afford to pay:

1) $13,142 a MONTH for expenses which include:

a) $1,250 for “Entertainment, gifts and vacation,”
b) $575 for “exercise, races”
c) and $850 for “eating out”
and the document even shows a loan to “Moote Profit Sharing Plan,” which was a concealed asset as the stipulated judgment shows.

Do these law firms, JUDGE CLAUDIA SILBAR and MR. HASSMAN think it is FUN and a GAME to take advantage of a loving Mother and her Children by depriving the loving Mother of receiving her community property interest and lawful spousal support award?

*** IF NOT, THEN WHY haven’t any of them tried to help resolve the invalid stipulated judgment with reasonable diligence and the parental alienation with reasonable diligence?

Think this shows their INTENT to keep the loving Mother and her Children alienated from each other since REASONABLE PEOPLE would try to help them reunite?

Think this shows their INTENT to deprive the loving Mother of her LEGAL RIGHTS to receive her community property and her lawful spousal support award based on the net worth of the completely and accurately disclosed community estate?

This is just the tip of the iceberg regarding millions of dollars of concealed community assets and income along with the parental alienation.

I, MRS. HASSMAN, the Loving Mother, am so grateful I have recovered in many ways and have learned to cope with the parental alienation; I clerked for a wonderful Judge who taught me many important lessons; I had a wonderful Grandfather Ben who also taught me many important lessons and I am bringing out the truth in many ways.
If not I, then who?
-By Sara Hassman, Parental Alienation Solution; Founder;www.PAlienation.org

Comments

 

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.