MOTION FOR TEMPORARY

XXX

[Insert Address]

[Insert State & ZIP Code]

[Insert Phone Number]

[Insert Email]

 

Plaintiff in pro per

 

 

 

[NAME OF COURT]

[JURISDICTION]

 

 

XXX, Plaintiff, vs. NAME OF DEFENDANT(s), Defendant(s)

) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Case No.: No. XXX     PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR TEMPORARY AND PERMANENT INJUNCTIVE RELIEF

 

 

NOTICE OF PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR TEMPORARY AND PERMANENT INJUNCTIVE RELIEF

 

You are hereby notified that on [Date], at ________ (am/pm), Joseph D. Correia will bring on for hearing his Motion for Temporary and Permanent Injunctive Relief against the Child Support Enforcement Division (hereinafter referred to as “CSE”). Plaintiff’s Motion will be based on this Notice of Motion, the attached Motion for Temporary and Permanent Injunctive Relief, exhibits adduced, and oral arguments presented during the hearing of the Motion for Temporary and Permanent Injunctive Relief.

 

Dated this ____ day of August,XXX.

 

Respectfully Submitted,

 

 

___________________________________

XXX,

Plaintiff in pro per

 

XXX

[Insert Address]

[Insert State & ZIP Code]

[Insert Phone Number]

[Insert Email]

 

Plaintiff in pro per

 

 

 

[NAME OF COURT]

[JURISDICTION]

 

 

XXX, Plaintiff, vs. NAME OF DEFENDANT(s), Defendant(s)

) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Case No.: No. XXX     PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR TEMPORARY AND PERMANENT INJUNCTIVE RELIEF

 

 

PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR TEMPORARY AND PERMANENT INJUNCTIVE RELIEF

NOW COMES XXX, Plaintiff, and files this Motion for Temporary and Injunctive Relief against CSE pursuant to Mass. Civ. R. P. 65, and for cause would show this Honorable Court as follows:

 

1. STATEMENT OF FACTS
2. Petitioner initiated this custody case two years ago, seeking appropriate arrangements for the Minor Child of the Parties.
3. During the course of the case, the matter of child support was introduced, expanding the scope of the proceedings to include not only custody but also the issue of financial support.
4. It is important to note that no formal agreements or signed documents were reached pertaining to the matter of child support during the course of the proceedings. No orders were issued regarding payment of child support by Plaintiff to Defendant.
5. Subsequent to the initiation of the custody case, CSE took active steps to enforce collection efforts of child support from Plaintiff to Defendant.
6. In response to these efforts, Petitioner took the initiative to directly communicate with child support services by sending cease and desist letters to CSE. These letters requested a cessation of their actions. However, the responses from CSE did not adhere to Plaintiff’s cessation request and continued their collection endeavors.
7. Furthermore, it has come to light that certain crucial elements required for the enforcement of collections are absent. Specifically: summons & complaint, proof of injury in fact, default, and a judgment order.
8. Petitioner’s legal strategy has been forced to resort to seeking an injunction against child support services. This resolve has been prompted by concerns related to due process and potential instances of fraud.
9. As a result of the aforementioned actions of CSE, Petitioner has suffered a series of adverse consequences, including: denial of his passport application, suspension of his driver’s license, and levying of his bank account
10. Given the presented facts, Petitioner respectfully seeks the intervention of this honorable court by temporary and permanent injunctive relief to address the issues outlined above.

 

1. STANDARD OF REVIEW
2. To determine whether a preliminary injunction should issue, a judge must evaluate (1) the plaintiff’s claim that he will suffer irreparable harm if the injunction is denied; (2) the injury the defendant will suffer if the injunction is granted; and (3) the likelihood of success on the merits. Commonwealth County of XXX
3. In an appropriate case, the risk of harm to the public interest also may be considered. See XXX). Where the balance of these risks cuts in favor of the moving party, a preliminary injunction may issue. Commonwealth v. County of XXX

 

1. LEGAL ARGUMENT

Plaintiff Will Suffer Irreparable Harm if He is Not Granted Temporary and Permanent Injunctive Reief Against CSE

12. Irreparable harm, in the context of legal proceedings, signifies damage that cannot be adequately remedied by monetary compensation or other forms of redress. It speaks to the unique and unquantifiable nature of the harm suffered, which eludes simple quantification or rectification.
13. In the present case, Plaintiff contends that the harm inflicted upon him by CSE’s actions is inherently of such a nature that it cannot be compensated for solely through monetary means.
14. Plaintiff’s passport application has been denied, a direct consequence of CSE’s collection efforts. This denial encroaches upon Plaintiff’s ability to travel freely, to engage in international commerce, and to exercise the basic rights associated with international mobility.
15. The potential ramifications extend beyond mere inconvenience. They permeate Plaintiff’s autonomy and ability to engage in activities that are integral to modern life.
16. A suspension of Plaintiff’s driver’s license ensues from the ongoing collection efforts. This suspension impedes Plaintiff’s capacity to commute to work, to attend to familial responsibilities, and to partake in activities that demand personal transportation. The tangible and intangible losses sustained through this suspension reverberate through every aspect of Plaintiff’s life.
17. The levying of Plaintiff’s bank account further accentuates the ripple effect of CSE’s actions. Plaintiff finds himself ensnared in a web of financial distress, unable to fulfill obligations, and grappling with the aftermath of their accounts being frozen. The domino effect stemming from this action culminates in Plaintiff’s economic stability being jeopardized, exacerbating the strain on his overall well-being.
18. The harm endured by Plaintiff transcends quantification; it is not a matter of mere dollars and cents. The denial of personal freedoms, the erosion of vital rights, and the disruption of life’s daily functions cannot be adequately addressed by financial remuneration.
19. No amount of money can restore Plaintiff’s passport, reactivate his driver’s license, or undo the levying of his bank account. Plaintiff seeks not only temporary injunctive relief but also permanent measures that would serve to shield them from the ongoing harm inflicted by CSE’s actions.
20. The urgency of Plaintiff’s plea for injunctive relief lies in the continuous nature of the harm suffered. The denial of personal freedoms, the suspension of critical rights, and the financial turmoil persist unabated. Without the court’s intervention, this harm becomes entrenched, eroding the very essence of Plaintiff’s quality of life and his capacity to partake in societal functions.
21. Granting injunctive relief to Plaintiff against CSE’s actions is not merely a matter of legal procedure; it is a manifestation of justice itself. It upholds the principle that individuals should not suffer needlessly when harm can be mitigated through decisive action.

 

Plaintiff Will Continue to Suffer Injury if He Is Not Granted Temporary and Permanent Injunctive Relief Against CSE

22. Plaintiff’s ordeal stems from the initiation of a custody case that gradually escalated to include matters of child support. However, despite the absence of formal agreements or signed documents, CSE embarked on aggressive collection efforts. These efforts have caused significant injury to Plaintiff’s life, affecting not only their financial stability but also their personal freedom.
23. Key injuries include the denial of a passport application, the suspension of a driver’s license, and the levying of a bank account. These actions, executed by CSE without proper due process or evidence of the requisite legal procedures, constitute a grave miscarriage of justice and a violation of Plaintiff’s rights.
24. If injunctive relief is denied, Plaintiff’s injuries will persist and potentially worsen. The denial of a passport application directly curtails Plaintiff’s ability to travel for personal, professional, and familial reasons.
25. A suspended driver’s license not only limits Plaintiff’s mobility but also obstructs their capacity to earn a livelihood. The levying of a bank account jeopardizes financial stability, with far-reaching consequences that ripple through all aspects of Plaintiff’s life.
26. In assessing whether to grant injunctive relief, the court must weigh the potential harm to both parties. In this case, the potential harm to CSE in halting their collection efforts pales in comparison to the irreversible injuries inflicted upon Plaintiff.
27. The balance of equities undeniably tips in favor of granting injunctive relief, as it aligns with principles of fairness, justice, and respect for individual rights.

 

Plaintiff Has a High Likelihood of Success on the Merits

28. At the heart of Plaintiff’s case lies the lack of due process and potential instances of fraud that have marred the proceedings initiated by CSE. Plaintiff has demonstrated an unwavering commitment to upholding the principles of due process, an indispensable cornerstone of our legal system that ensures that every individual is afforded fair treatment and an opportunity to be heard.
29. The absence of essential documentation, including the Summons & Complaint, Proof of Injury In Fact, Default, and Judgment Order, raises grave concerns about the legitimacy and integrity of the collection efforts undertaken by the defendant. These documents form the bedrock upon which any credible legal action must stand.
30. Their absence not only undermines CSE’s claim to enforcement but also casts a shadow of doubt upon the very foundation of their actions. This pivotal lapse in due process serves as a compelling basis for Plaintiff’s pursuit of injunctive relief against the defendant’s actions.
31. Furthermore, Plaintiff’s assertion that fraudulent activities may have played a role in CSE’s endeavors is not to be taken lightly. Fraudulent conduct undermines the very essence of justice and fairness, corroding the principles upon which our legal system is constructed.
32. Plaintiff’s resort to seek an injunction against CSE’s actions in light of the potential for fraud is not only a reasonable response but also a necessary one to safeguard the sanctity of legal proceedings.
33. Plaintiff’s case is fortified by a trail of cease and desist letters that were addressed directly to CSE, requesting that they cease their actions. CSE’s response, which acknowledged Plaintiff’s demands yet ignored the cessation request, speaks volumes about their intentions. This blatant disregard for Plaintiff’s appeals for fairness and the absence of due process underscores the urgency of Plaintiff’s quest for injunctive relief.
34. Furthermore, Plaintiff’s sufferings due to CSE’s actions cannot be trivialized. The denial of the Plaintiff’s passport application, the suspension of their driver’s license, and the levying of their bank account constitute a tangible and distressing series of consequences.
35. These actions have far-reaching implications that extend beyond the mere financial realm. Plaintiff’s predicament is a clear reflection of the potential life-altering consequences that can arise from procedural inadequacies and unchecked enforcement efforts.
36. In assessing Plaintiff’s likelihood of success on the merits, it is imperative to consider the broader legal landscape and relevant precedent. Throughout legal history, courts have consistently held due process and fairness in the highest regard.
37. The principles enshrined in the Constitution of the United States, as well as various state laws, underscore the sanctity of due process and the imperative of preventing fraud. Plaintiff’s case aligns seamlessly with these core tenets, positioning them on a trajectory toward success.

 

Violation of Petitioner’s Rights Under CFR

38. Violation of 45 CFR § 302.70 – Provision of Services in Interstate Cases: CSE’s failure to provide the essential documentation, including the Summons & Complaint, Proof of Injury In Fact, Default, and Judgment Order, directly violates the requirements outlined in 45 CFR § 302.70. This regulation mandates that proper documentation and procedures be adhered to in interstate cases. By initiating enforcement actions without these crucial documents, CSE compromised the due process rights guaranteed under CFR.
39. Violation of 45 CFR § 303.6 – Due Process: The heart of the matter lies in the violation of the due process rights enshrined in 45 CFR § 303.6. Petitioner’s rights to notice, opportunity to be heard, and a fair and just legal process have been potentially violated due to CSE’s actions. By failing to provide proper documentation and adhere to established procedures, CSE has infringed upon the very essence of due process, undermining the principles of justice and fairness.
40. Violation of 45 CFR § 303.101 – Review and Adjustment of Child Support Orders: The violation of CFR is compounded by CSE’s actions contravening 45 CFR § 303.101. CSE’s enforcement actions, undertaken without proper documentation and due process, demonstrate a disregard for the necessary procedures to review and adjust child support orders. This violation not only compromises Petitioner’s rights but also undermines the legitimacy of CSE’s enforcement efforts.
41. Violation of 45 CFR § 303.108 – Enforcement of Support Obligations: The actions of CSE raise concerns about the adherence to 45 CFR § 303.108, which governs the enforcement of support obligations. By initiating punitive measures, such as levying the Petitioner’s bank account and suspending his driver’s license, without proper due process and documentation, CSE’s actions are contrary to the mandated methods and procedures outlined in this regulation

 

1. PRAYER FOR RELIEF

NOW, THEREFORE, Plaintiff, respectfully petitions this honorable court for the following prayer for relief, seeking both temporary and permanent injunctive relief against Child Support Enforcement (CSE):

1. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff beseeches this court to grant immediate temporary injunctive relief, restraining and enjoining CSE from any further collection efforts, actions, or enforcement actions related to the purported child support obligation, until the merits of this case can be thoroughly examined.
2. The Plaintiff prays for this court to direct CSE to cease and desist all collection actions, including but not limited to the levying of bank accounts, the suspension of the Plaintiff’s driver’s license, and any other punitive measures, pending a full and fair adjudication of the matters raised in this case.
3. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff implores this court to issue a permanent injunction, prohibiting CSE from initiating or continuing any enforcement actions or collection efforts related to the alleged child support obligation, unless and until proper due process has been observed and all necessary legal documentation, including the Summons & Complaint, Proof of Injury In Fact, Default, and Judgment Order, have been presented and duly recognized by this court.
4. The Plaintiff respectfully requests this court to order CSE to refrain from engaging in any fraudulent or unjust actions, ensuring that all future enforcement activities are conducted in strict accordance with the law and principles of fairness.
5. Plaintiff prays that this honorable court awards reasonable costs incurred in the pursuit of this action, given the necessity of legal intervention to secure justice, protect due process, and rectify the damages suffered by Plaintiff due to CSE’s actions.
6. Plaintiff also requests such other and further relief as this court deems just and proper under the circumstances, in alignment with the principles of justice, fairness, and protection against undue harm.

 

Dated this ____ day of August, XXX,

 

Respectfully Submitted,

 

 

___________________________________

XXX,

Plaintiff in pro per

 

At Legal writing experts, we would be happy to assist in preparing any legal document you need. We are international lawyers and attorneys with significant experience in legal drafting, Commercial-Corporate practice and consulting. In the last few years, we have successfully undertaken similar assignments for clients from different jurisdictions. If given this opportunity, The LegalPen will be able to prepare the legal document within the shortest time possible. You can send us your quick enquiry ( here )