|
 |
| |
(At this point, Jerry K. seeked legal counsel through Lawrence La Rocca. Lawrence La Rocca took the time educated his client and had facinating detailed facts about the laws both out-of-state and within the state of California. He explained to Jerry K. that within California jurisdiction, the laws were stacked up against the biological father, unlike other states. Taking all things into consideration, Lawrence Larocca decided to go forward to aid Jerry K. and take on this case even though the illogical laws were to Jerry K.'s severe disadvantage.
Lawrence Larocca also took the time to educated his client, Jerry K., about P.A.S. and to not fall victim of this).
|
Upon Dawn D.'s return to her husband she completely retracting her claim as Jerry K. not being the child's father. Dawn D. stated that she is completely excluding any father's rights/support from Jerry K., but also stating that Jerry would never be able to even see the child once the child is born. Acting as Jerry K.'s attorney, Lawrence Larocca immediately filed a motion with the county court. While in court, Lawrence Larocca was able to convince the judge to completely defy the California law and allow a paternity test to be performed. The paternity test resulted in Jerry K. as the father of the child.
This case now escalated to the Supreme Court level. Lawrence Larocca's office prepared the brief for the case. The Supreme Court had a 5-2 decision vacating the order and dismissed the case because the California legislature would have to change the law that 20 other states already logically changed in the biological father's favor.
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
The joy of winning the trial was saddened by the wrong illogical decision of the court which refused to allow updated scientific genetic evidence determining the concrete paternal testing results. This unchanged old law has and will affect lives permanently on a negative premise, simply because of an archaic out-of-date 250 year common law predating the science of genetic DNA testing (which other states have already properly changed and updated). If this were one of the many other states other than California, the outcome would have been a unanimously victorious in the favor of the child and Jerry K. also would have sustained as morally correct to most of the general populous.
|
The California Supreme Court's verdict shed a spotlight of attention on this oppressively old California law and court ruling and Lawrence Larocca was asked to be a guest on the 'Today's Show' regarding this 'coup de grace' of poor statewide California legislation. This exposure set the motion momentum for California legislation to reconsider this obsolete law that effects hundreds of children every year defying science and common sense.
|
*For more information regarding 15 years of prevailing case history, please contact the main office for these details: (951) 682-4900
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
