UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE
____________________________________
)Leisha Tringali, ) Civil Action No.: 12-CV-124-PB)Plaintiff ))vs. )))Department of Transitional Assistance, et al.
,
))Defendants )____________________________________ )
Plaintiff’s
Affidavit of Fact
My name is Leisha Tringali. I am thirty-eight years old. I currently reside at 11 Indian ValleyRoad, Pelham, New Hampshire, 03076.Plaintiff is aggrieved by the defendant's final determination regarding actions taken in collectingand disbursing child support or, regarding the plaintiff's failure to comply with a subpoena,summons, or orders in which the plaintiff was never named as a party. Complaint at 14.In this case, the Department of Revenue
–
Child Enforcement Agency ( hereinafter the
“DOR/CSE” )
failed to afford either of these aspects of due process to plaintiff when decidingthe amount of her child support obligation. Id. 16.Plaintiff alleges the defendant's final determination was in error and without just cause for thefollowing reason(s): Id. 18.On September 29, 1998, the Middlesex Probate and Family Court ( Dilday, J. ) modified theJudgment of Divorce dated August 20, 1996. Judgment was entered in accordance with astipulation dated September 29, 1998 that Matthew Tringali ( biological Father ) and LeishaTringali ( biological Mother ) shall have joint legal and physical custody under case docket 96D1305. Id. 19.On April 12, 2000 the Paternal Grandfather Peter Tringali filed an emergency affidavit againstMatthew Tringali, petitioning the Middlesex Probate and Family Court ( Sahagain, J. ) fortemporary guardianship under case docket 99P 5181GM. Id. 21.
Judge Sahagain granted temporary guardianship for a period expiring on July 11, 2000. Id. 22.The plaintiff claims that her due process rights were violated by the Middlesex Probate andFamily Court for failure to follow procedural due process law, more specifically M.G.L. 215 s. 6
( c ) which requires “notice to both parents”. Whereas a citation was issued to return on July 5,
2000 on an emergency basis clearly shows that this order exceeded the five days required underM.G.L 215 s. 6 ( c ). Id. 23.Plaintiff hereby alleges that the custody of the minor child was removed from her illegally.Id.26. A.
) Plaintiff alleges the minor child was illegally removed from her physical custody.B.
) lack of evidence in case file to prove plaintiff unfit.C.
) proper notice wasn‟t given
On August 9, 2001 the Paternal Grandfather, Peter Tringali filed a motion for child support. Ahearing was scheduled for September 10, 2001 under docket number 99P 5181GM. Id. 27.On September 10, 2001 the Paternal Grandfather, Peter Tringali withdrew his motion for childsupport. Id. 28.On September 20, 2001 Lucia Miller for the DOR/CSE filed a complaint for modification of Judgment dated August 29,1996 on behalf of theDepartment of Transitional Assistance (hereinafter the
“DTA” ) against Leisha Eshbach under
docket number 96D 1305. Id. 29.On October 18, 2001 a summons was issued to Leisha Eshbach. Id. 30.Plaintiff asserts that her legal name is Leisha Tringali. Plaintiff further asserts that her legal nameis not now nor ever was her name Leisha Eshbach. Id. 31.Plaintiff declares any order that names Leisha Eshbach can not be enforceable upon plaintiff without violating her due process rights.Id. 32.On or about April 18, 2002 the DTA motioned for temporary orders for support against LeishaEshbach. The DTA further requested for financial statement against Leisha Eshbach.Id.33.The DTA motioned for Child Support against Leisha Eshbach. Id. 34.Plaintiff asserts that her legal name is Leisha Tringali. Plaintiff further asserts that her legal nameis not now nor ever was her name Leisha Eshbach. Id. 35.Plaintiff declares any order that names Leisha Eshbach can not be enforceable upon plaintiff without violating her due process rights.Id. 36.On June 25, 2002 Hannah Attuso filed notice of appearance for DOR/CSE as counsel for DTAwith the Middlesex Probate and Family Court ( Donnnelly, J. ) The DTA motioned theMiddlesex Probate and Family Court to request for financial statement against Leisha Eshbach.Id. 39.
Judge Edward Donnelly, Jr. issued a temporary order for support and assignment of incomeagainst Leisha Eshbach under docket number 96D 1305. Id. 40.Plaintiff asserts that her legal name is Leisha Tringali. Plaintiff further asserts that her legal nameis not now nor ever was her name Leisha Eshbach. Id. 41.Again plaintiff declares any order that names Leisha Eshbach can not be enforceable uponplaintiff without violating her due process rights.Id. 42.The DOR/CSE without the express authorization of the plaintiff transferred her personalidentifying information ( Social Security Number ) to obtain child support payments under asyntheticidentity created by the DTA. Id. 43.On or about March 24, 2003 The DOR levied $475.98 from Citizens Bank of Massachusetts
from Leisha Tringali, the plaintiff‟s account. Account number 110998
-XXX-X. Id. 44.On or about April 26, 2003 The DOR intercepted an insurance claim payment from the plaintiff in the amount of $1327.50. Id. 44.On or about September 13, 2003 The DOR levied $1906.00 from Citizens Bank of
Massachusetts from the plaintiff„s account. Account Number 110998
-XXX-X. Id. 45.Sometime in 2006 The DOR intercepted an insurance claim settlement payment from theplaintiff in the amount of $10,000.00. Id. 46.The plaintiff requested an administrative review with the DOR/CSE and was never given propernotice of the outcome. Id. 47.On or about November 3, 2004 the DOR/CSE denied the ability to conduct an administrativereview as they could not modify a court order. Id. 48.Plaintiff asserts The DOR/CSE without the express authorization of the plaintiff transferred herpersonal identifying information ( Social Security Number ) to obtain child support paymentsunder asyntheticidentity created by the DTA therefore modifying an order without amodification from the court. Id. 50.52. On December 5, 2003 the Middlesex Probate and Family Court ( McSweeny, J. ) appointedPeter Tringali permanent guardianship with custody of the minor child ZT under docket number99P 5181GM. Id. 52.Judge McSweeny did not order child support regarding of the minor child ZT in the Decree. Id.53.Plaintiff asserts any temporary order of support against the plaintiff would not be enforceableafter the entry of a final judgment and or decree. Id. 54.
Search History:
Result 00 of 00
00 results for result for
p.
Recommended
More From This User
Notes
Load more
