Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Congressman Billybob
"And the first action of that counsel should have been to file for a divorce."

But that statement illustrates perfectly the bizarre, irrational context of this case. Because Terri was deemed incompetent to make ANY decisions for herself, MS, by mere virtue of his status as her husband, was virtually automatically appointed as Terri's Guardian and spoke for her in all matters - i.e., She had NO voice other than through MS.

In order for her to achieve a divorce she would FIRST have to acquire another voice by removing MS as the Guardian. Talk about cruel fate to have the person most apt to gain from your demise controlling your water and food and actually aided and abetted in shutting it off by the corrupt legal system!

Circular, Circular circumstances that have my head in a fog!

120 posted on 04/01/2005 9:08:30 PM PST by drt1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies ]


To: drt1
No. If a person has a lawyer representing him/her alone, that lawyer has the right to file appropriate pleadings in his/her name. To be specific, a husband cannot order counsel for a wife NOT to file a divorce action.

Billybob
129 posted on 04/01/2005 9:12:14 PM PST by Congressman Billybob (Proud to be a FORMER member of the Bar of the US Supreme Court since July, 2004.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 120 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson