Family Law
Judge Sent Homeless Man to Jail for Failing to Support Boy Who Wasn’t His
Posted Jul 15, 2009 6:37 AM CST
By Debra Cassens Weiss
Updated: A judge who put a homeless man in a South Georgia jail for more than a year for failing to pay the costs of supporting his “son” knew there was no biological tie.
On Wednesday, the judge released Frank Hatley after his new lawyer from the Southern Center for Human Rights made a showing that her client is indigent, the Atlanta Journal-Constitution reports.
DNA tests show that Frank Hatley is not the father of the boy for whom he assumed responsibility by reimbursing the state thousands of dollars paid in public assistance for the child, the Atlanta Journal-Constitution reported in an earlier story.
When Hatley learned he was not the father in 2000, he went to court to be relieved of the responsibility to pay future child support, but he never got an order lifted requiring him to repay the state for public assistance, the story says.
A 2001 order signed by Cook County Superior Court Judge Dane Perkins required Hatley to reimburse the state for more than $16,000, even as it acknowledged that Hatley was not the boy’s father, the story says. Hatley made monthly payments totaling some $6,000. After losing his job last year and becoming homeless, Hatley continued to pay for a while. But after several missed payments, Perkins signed an order jailing Hatley for contempt of court, according to the account.
Hatley found a lawyer—Sarah Geraghty of the Southern Center for Human Rights in Atlanta—after the county sheriff asked for assistance. “This is a case of excessive zeal to recover money trumping common sense,” Geraghty told the Journal-Constitution.
Updated coverage:
ABAJournal.com: "Homeless Man, Jailed for Failing to Support Boy Who Wasn’t His, Is Freed"
Updated on July 16 to include the judge's ruling setting Hatley free.
- How B of A’s GC Got Fired: Leave Now, and Leave Your BlackBerry Behind
- Schools Ranked by 'Super Lawyers' Produced
- Law Firm Price Wars Break Out as Some Try ‘Loss Leader’ Bids for Work
- Five Questions for Law Firms Abandoning Lockstep Compensation
- Judge Jails 2 Attorneys for Contempt in 4 Days
- Reed Smith Will Ask Nonequity Partners to Pony Up Possibly 15% of Pay
- Court Deputy Ordered to Apologize or Face Jail After Taking Lawyer's Paperwork
- Skadden Jumps on the Bonus Bandwagon
- ABA Executive Director Resigns
- Nasty Attitude to Co-Worker, Naughty Word in E-Mail Cost 2 Their Jobs
Should Supreme Court Justices Be Able to Review News Accounts Before Publication?
Comments
B. McLeod
Jul 15, 2009 7:27 AM CST
“Excessive zeal to recover money”? I think if there was some “zeal” here, it might find expression in having the mother identify the actual father, who might actually have assets (as opposed to an unemployed, homeless man). This is a dereliction of duty all the way around. The state has spent more than the $16,000 keeping the non-father in jail for a year, with, apparently, no attempt to locate or pursue the real father. Morons.
Flag this comment
James
Jul 15, 2009 10:39 AM CST
Agreed McLeod, there’s something just inherently wrong with a man being ordered to pay for a kid that’s not his simply because he paid for the kid in the past. My state does this as well and it’s a disgusting process. Many times they even do it as they’re taking away parental rights.
Here’s how you unearth the real father. Put mom on the hook for the payments received to the state AND for reimbursing the man who paid the support in the first place. She can get out of the former if she produces the real father who could subsequently be confirmed by DNA testing.
BTW… with the widespread availablity of DNA testing today is there anyone who thinks that a father should ever be held liable without it?
Flag this comment
James
Jul 15, 2009 10:43 AM CST
Also, given that the process is done by mouth swab now. Why not just have a blanket rule that anyone can be ordered to produce a swab upon a sworn affaidavit from someone saying that there is a chance that he might be the father. The person making application pays the cost to send a mobile DNA tester to the location of the named person’s choosing and if found to be the father the cost can be factored into child supoort. If not, we’ll it will discourage friviolous applications.
Flag this comment
Jim | 2009-07-15-Wed 1322 -0400
Jul 15, 2009 11:22 AM CST
Such rulings make it easier to understand [Ohio] Justice Lanzginger’s speech title.
March 23, 1994
“Don’t Kill the Umpire: Why We Need Independent Judges,” Zenobia Shrine, Toledo
SOURCE:http://sc.ohio.gov/SCO/justices/lanzinger/additionalinfo.asp
Flag this comment
oops! Jim | 2009-07-15-Wed 1326 -0400
Jul 15, 2009 11:25 AM CST
Lanzinger not LanzGinger
Flag this comment
Joe
Jul 16, 2009 1:43 AM CST
It looks like Judge Dane Perkins signed the order to release Frank Hatley to salvage his reputation now that the press has shed light on the fact that he put Hatley in jail in 2001 with full knowledge that he wasn’t the father. In fact, court records now reveal that Hatley wasn’t advised that he could have a court appointed lawyer if he couldn’t afford one. I think Judge Perkins and Homerville lawyer Charles Reddick (who prepared the order from the state attorney general’s office to jail Hatley) should be ashamed of themselves.
Flag this comment
Debra Doux
Jul 16, 2009 3:37 AM CST
He should NOT have to pay. He is NOT the father. This is really UNFAIR. Why should HE go to jail. I think this is OUTRAGEUS!
Flag this comment
B. McLeod
Jul 16, 2009 7:14 AM CST
Well put, “Debra”. I’ll bet you have some COMMENTS on the Sotomayor hearings TOO.
Flag this comment
DR
Jul 16, 2009 8:13 AM CST
Commentor No. 7 sounds oddly familiar.
Flag this comment
B. McLeod
Jul 16, 2009 9:43 AM CST
DR, you have a keen eye. While the Mollerator is away, the mice will play!
Flag this comment
Reprobate Mind
Jul 16, 2009 10:11 AM CST
Don’t anyone say anything concerning #7! Shh. Mums the word. We need SOMEONE with some COMMON since arond here, or at least thats what my WIFE tells me. Besidez, i MISS the old poster! If I divorce my wife, we are going to get MARRIED!
Flag this comment
DR
Jul 16, 2009 2:31 PM CST
@ No. 11: Alan, is that you?!!
Flag this comment
Reprobate Mind
Jul 16, 2009 5:16 PM CST
No, just some shmuck with 100k in debt who decided to check out the website and post instead of working on discovery like I should be doing. There is a certain former poster on here that I miss, and I THOUGHT that I wood HONER her memory and tell her that if I leave my wife I will MARRY her!
Flag this comment
DR
Jul 16, 2009 7:22 PM CST
Oh schucks…I thought you might be “Alan” or “Allen” or Mr. “Veoli”...the guy who claimed to have married said poster. My bad.
Flag this comment
gacsr
Jul 17, 2009 6:20 AM CST
Welcome to Georgia, where the ‘system’ is controlled by a group of high priced lawyers and enabling judges. Fathers here are nothing more than ATMs. My ‘guess’ is that Mr. Hatley didn’t qualify for indigent defense counsel when he was first ordered to pay childsupport, and the system ran right over him. Sad. Happens in this economy more than you’d think. Our guidelines work to push fathers into bankruptcy and homelessness all in the name of the ‘child’s best interest’. (read: Mommy’s best interest).
Interestingly enough, Judge Perkins was the first judge in GA to rule our old CS Guidelines to be unconstitutional, but he was overturned by the GA Supreme Court who said that he lacked the jurisdiction to make the claim. 4 years ago GA finally went to income shares, but almost every deviation must be authorized by your judge. Talk about inconsistency in rulings!
With a legislature made up of almost 25% lawyers who practice some form of family law, we will never get it right in this state. But we won’t quit trying.
www.gafamilylawreform.org
Flag this comment
Add a Comment
We welcome your comments, but please adhere to our comment policy.
Commenting has expired on this post.