No. 24-322

Kristin Bausch v. Jacob Frost, et al.

Lower Court: Seventh Circuit
Docketed: 2024-09-20
Status: Denied
Type: Paid
Response Waived
Tags: accardi-doctrine agency-regulations appellate-procedure due-process subject-matter-jurisdiction turner-rogers-hearing
Key Terms:
DueProcess
Latest Conference: 2024-11-15
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Whether the Seventh Circuit lacked subject matter jurisdiction due to failure to conduct a mandatory Turner v. Rogers hearing and potential due process violations

Question Presented (from Petition)

QUESTION PRESENTED ; ‘ The issue before this Court is whether the Seventh Circuit of the Western District of Wisconsin had subject matter jurisdiction over the case. The Plaintiff should be notified that a mandatory Turner v. Rogers, 564 U.S. 431 : (2011) was not conducted. Appellate was not given Turner Rogers hearing. Given the absence of a mandated Turner hearing, and . : whether this would be an infringement of the Appellant's due process rights and a legal reason for the court to take © ; action? : Women are not a part of child support. Nothing in the federal statute discusses establishment of maternity for support. Appellate has brought forward this discovery within Blessing v. Freestone 520 U.S. 329 , ; (1997). . The Accardi Doctrine requires government officials to follow agency regulations which has become an important rule of law even when it’s not convenient. Unpublished agency guidelines are not considered binding rules under this doctrine, but guidelines that establish procedural and substantive restraints to protect individuals from arbitrary treatment by government officials should be covered. It's important to have a consistent application of these rules, especially in cases where individual rights are affected. See United States ex rel. Accardi vs. Shaughnessy, 347 U.S. 260 (1954).

Docket Entries

2024-11-18
Petition DENIED.
2024-10-30
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 11/15/2024.
2024-10-29
Waiver of right of respondent Respondent Emily Wilson to respond filed.
2024-10-29
Waiver of right of respondent Emily Wilson to respond filed.
2024-10-09
Waiver of right of respondent Jacob Frost to respond filed.
2024-10-07
Waiver of Jason Hanson, Jane Jacobs, Lisa Bina, Nancy Haack, Jennifer Cooke and Criscilda Chairez of right to respond submitted.
2024-10-07
Waiver of right of respondents Jason Hanson, Jane Jacobs, Lisa Bina, Nancy Haack, Jennifer Cooke and Criscilda Chairez to respond filed.
2024-04-30

Attorneys

Emily Wilson
Maria del Pizzo SandersVon Briesen & Roper, S.C., Respondent
Maria del Pizzo Sandersvon Briesen & Roper, s.c., Respondent
Jacob Frost
Jon J. WhitneyWisconsin Department of Justice, Respondent
Jon J. WhitneyWisconsin Department of Justice, Respondent
Jason Hanson, Jane Jacobs, Lisa Bina, Nancy Haack, Jennifer Cooke and Criscilda Chairez
Sheila M. SullivanBell, Moore & Richter, S.C., Respondent
Sheila M. SullivanBell, Moore & Richter, S.C., Respondent
Kristin Bausch
Kristin Bausch — Petitioner
Kristin Bausch — Petitioner
Respondent Emily Wilson
Maria del Pizzo SandersVon Briesen & Roper, S.C., Respondent