No. 24A415

Richard Rynn, et al. v. Daniel Washburn, et al.

Lower Court: Arizona
Docketed: 2024-10-29
Status: Denied
Type: A
Experienced Counsel
Tags: child-custody constitutional-rights due-process ex-parte-injunction parental-rights state-court
Latest Conference: 2025-01-10
Question Presented (from Petition)

1. Does the legal standard of evidence require a showing of imminent harm to justify the issuance of an ex parte custody injunction without notice?

2. Critical contradictions between district court decision an order from doctor and state court Division One decision of no doctor order arising case as a basis to vacate and reopen case for fraud.

3. Deprivation of rights under color of law by private companies seizing parents child under direction of the state without obtaining legal custody.

4. The age of the minor does not impact the right to vacate an injunction that was issued fraudulently and without jurisdiction.

Question Presented (AI Summary)

Whether a state court can issue an ex parte child custody injunction without notice when there is no showing of imminent harm to the child

Docket Entries

2025-01-13
Application (24A415) denied by the Court.
2024-12-04
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/10/2025.
2024-12-04
Application (24A415) referred to the Court.
2024-11-12
Application (24A415) refiled and submitted to Justice Alito.
2024-10-30
Application (24A415) denied by Justice Kagan.
2024-10-21
Application (24A415) to vacate injunction, submitted to Justice Kagan.

Attorneys

Richard Rynn, et al.
Richard Rynn — Petitioner