In Miller v. Miller, Attorney Carson J. Tucker of Lex Fori PLLC appeared pro hac vice and filed a supplemental brief to bring the state trial court’s attention to the sweeping unanimous opinions secured by Mr. Tucker in the Supreme Court of Michigan case of Foster v. Foster and the United States Supreme Court case of Howell v. Howell, both of which Mr. Tucker participated in as direct appellate counsel or amicus counsel.
Mr. Tucker has been “boots on the ground” in this Tennessee proceeding since August of 2018 in an effort to ensure that our disabled veteran population outside of Fort Campbell, Kentucky is defended under the federal laws designed to protect them.
Trinity Advocates puts “Boots on the Ground” to fight state court encroachment and overreaching. The march across the country continues in an effort to restore to those disabled veterans their constitutional entitlements in their disability pay, which has heretofore been taken by unscrupulous lawyers and state court systems convinced that they can ignore the absolute preemptive effect of federal law in this area. No more! The United States Constitution requires state court judges to abide by federal law and not to enter any order or judgment contradicting the statutes passed by Congress pursuant to its enumerated Article I powers in the Constitution. These powers were delegated to the federal government and the states have no say in the matter, anything in the constitutions, laws or judgments of the states to the contrary notwithstanding. These powers are the source for the benefits paid to our military servicemembers and veterans for the sacrifices they have made fighting for and serving the nation.
The fight continues. We’ve got your six!
A local judge recommended filing a case in federal court against the State of Florida. Is this possible to recoup monies spent for trial and appellant legal fees spent fighting an unjust statue allowing federally protected disability to be counted as income for alimony?
Federal disability benefits are constitutionally protected property rights. Therefore, certain actions can be brought in terms of how disabled veterans and the beneficiaries of these benefits are treated in state courts under the Civil Rights Act, 42 USC 1983. Also, 38 USC 5301 affirmatively protects these benefits from any state legal or equitable process, and that statute has been used in the past in conjunction with 42 USC 1983 to file actions for damages in federal court. The key is the defendant has to be a “state actor” and to succeed in such an action, one has to address the potential defense of immunity and/or qualified immunity from such suits. We are working on several state and federal cases in which we are exploring all facets of these types of claims and actions. The right case and the right facts are important. Thanks for your comment.