Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Shad0wSmurf t1_j2uqzae wrote

Reply to comment by BaconComposter in I am 100% for this and want to see what everyone in Pennsylvania thinks ? Kill a parent drunk driving pay child support. by [deleted]

"[..] My kid doesn't deserve less because I died by some loser."

  • There is no replacement for your income in any of the 49 states and district of Columbia aside from this law.

You're missing something I think.. If you contribute nothing (because anywhere else, you DESERVE nothing; according to the laws)to your minor kid, and you are killed Your child's standards of living aren't "perpetually reimbursed" with support payments .

5

BaconComposter t1_j2urwbm wrote

I’m saying that my children’s needs are not relative to the income of the person that killed me.

1

Shad0wSmurf t1_j2ushf7 wrote

That's exactly correct. Which is why it's irrelevant if you're hit by a loser and they can't pay anything , and it's irrelevant if you're hit by a rich person . No where else is your "standard of living" relative except for under this law, that has yet to be tested in court. You're irrelevant .Sadly

5

BaconComposter t1_j2ut1h5 wrote

I think the amount equivalent to child support is not unreasonable.

1

Shad0wSmurf t1_j2uu19y wrote

You're under the impression that child support actually is paid, and have no scope of the issues that arise just in FAMILY COURT, let alone if you are trying to traverse a criminal case into a family court situation because unless the law has set up a whole new legal administrative arm to deal with JUST THESE CASES, there would be no doubt that those families would never get paid.

Plus, I'm betting highly that insurance companies are going to drop coverage for payments on death benefits because that would be "double dipping" and screw the families out of civil judgment for wrongful death.. So.. It's probably understandable that you think equivalent child support is not unreasonable , because you only WANT it to not be unreasonable

6

BaconComposter t1_j2uu7oo wrote

I hate this website

3

Shad0wSmurf t1_j2uw6vk wrote

Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 39, Chapter 13, Part 2, is amended by adding the following as a new section:

(e) ( 1) If the surviving parent or guardian of the child brings a civil action against the defendant prior to the sentencing court ordering child maintenance payments as restitution and the surviving parent or guardian obtains a judgment in the civil suit, then no maintenance shall be ordered under this section.

(2) If the court orders the defendant to make child maintenance payments as restitution under this section and the surviving parent or guardian subsequently brings a civil action and obtains a judgment, then the child maintenance order shall be offset by the amount of the judgment awarded in the civil action.

1

WCAIS_PA_Individual t1_j2v3a4l wrote

Oh, and the lawyers are going to have a field day with the wording of that law. -

(e) ( 1) If the surviving parent or guardian of the child brings a civil action against the defendant;

  • prior to the sentencing court ordering child maintenance payments as restitution
  1. If the parent or guardian brings a suit prior to final sentencing, they must have a judgment before sentencing is completed. The word AND is a connecting word that BOTH needed to be fulfilled to fulfill the needs of e(1)

[...] AND the surviving parent or guardian obtains a judgment in the civil suit, then no maintenance shall be ordered under this section.

(2) If the court orders the defendant to make child maintenance payments as restitution under this section [and]

  1. Meaning that unless at final sentencing the judge orders child maintenance payments; (Because there has yet to be a Civil action against the defendant) there is a offset of the judgment awarded, which tend to be higher dollars only because they go to jury trials. They will receive nothing in "child maintenance".

and the surviving parent or guardian subsequently brings a civil action and obtains a judgment. [,]

then the child maintenance order shall be offset by the amount of the judgment awarded in the civil action.

  1. If the civil actions fails, then child maintenance will have to have been awarded by the judge prior.

Meaning, if the defendant lawyers up, the DUI and manslaughter (or whatever they wanna chalk it up to), could take 2+ years until it's all said and done, and the victim cannot start a civil action during that time or they are on a running clock because the judge cannot grant "child maintenance payments" if there is not a judgment before the criminal case concludes. Meaning , if the civil actions fail and you started before their case was done. You actually get nothing .

1