Mail

Recent Posts

Popular Posts

Desiree Capuano & James Pendleton
250 E. Placita Lago Del Mago
Sahuarita, AZ     85629
Tel: 520-288-8200
desiree.capuano@gmail.com
japendletonjr@gmail.com
Back to Mailbox Back to mailbox
Newer Message Newer message
Older Message Older message
Re: Response to petition for annulment
From: Patrick <patrick@desireecapuano.com>
To: Desiree Capuano <desiree.capuano@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, Mar 15 2015 9:29:19 pm
By the way, you said in your declaration that you were only 18 when we 
got married.  You were actually 19, and only 5 weeks away from turning 
20.  Not that it's material to the matter, though.

Patrick


On 03/15/2015 06:45 PM, Patrick wrote:
> Hello, Desiree.
>
> I'm assuming by now you're received your mail and you've convinced 
> yourself that my resposne to your petition for annulment is irrelevant 
> because the California court has dismissed the petition for 
> dissolution that I filed back in November 2012.  But as far as I 
> recall the California court did no such thing.  At our last hearing 
> the clerk asked the court about how to proceed with the dissolution 
> and the commissioner responded that if you wanted to go forward with 
> that you'll have to file in Arizona.  That, unfortunately for you, is 
> not a dismissal.  Moreover, a court does not have the authority to 
> arbitrarily dismiss a petition - there MUST be a legal basis for such 
> a dismissal, and the California court provided no such legal basis.  
> As far as I can tell, the only basis the California court provided for 
> NOT proceeding with litigating my petition at that time was that it 
> couldn't find the petition in the case file - but you and I both have 
> our stamped copies so that's all we  need to provide as proof that the 
> petition was filed...and that the matter IS pending before the Compton 
> court.
>
> And, finally, what is important right now is whether or not the matter 
> of our marriage was already pending before another court *on the date 
> you filed your current petition in Arizona*.  So, even if the 
> California court dismisses that petition tomorrow (which it can't 
> because, again, it requires a legitimate, legal basis to do so), then 
> you'd still have to refile and start the process over in Arizona.
>
> I could have saved you a lot of time and effort and told you this a 
> long time ago, but why would I?  How would that serve my interests?  
> And remember, in order to use bigamy as a basis for an annulment you 
> will have to prove that I was already *legally* married to another 
> person on August 26, 2000.  The important part there is already 
> "legally married".  Meaning that the person I was allegedly married to 
> was not, herself, already married to another person at the time I 
> allegedly married her...and that I was the actual person that she 
> married.  I have documentation and the witnesses to contradict your 
> claims - including an affidavit from Kim Shires stating that I am not 
> the person she married.  But, we'll deal with all that when it become 
> relevant :) .
>
> Good day, Desiree.  I hope you enjoyed your week in Alabama and Tampa.
>
> Cheers,
> Patrick
>
> P.S. I've decided to put your seb site back up but haven't had time to 
> update the content.