u/Aggressive_Desk_9179

One thing Hobbes understood that still feels true today is that institutions hold enormous power because ordinary people depend on them to navigate conflict. Lawyers, judges, and officials walk into court already understanding the rules, procedures, and power structures behind the system. Most regular people don’t.

For a layperson, the justice system can feel less like “justice” and more like entering a maze designed by professionals who already know every exit. The barriers, procedure, cost, terminology, delays, jurisdictional rules, filing standards often feel institutionally intentional, even if they’re defended as necessary for order.

That’s where Hobbes becomes relevant again: the state claims authority because it promises stability and fairness, but when ordinary people feel powerless inside the system itself, trust in that social contract starts to break down.

This is for Oregon

Working on a state appeal reply brief. Any tips on how to best organize it when you are responding to 2 separate respondents who are making very different arguments.

Back in February I filed my opening brief for the 9th circuit of appeals. Last month opposing counsel filed a streamline extension request and that was approved the same day. Last week opposing counsel asked if I object to them filing a 2nd extension and I did not, largely due to them being government workers and just doing their jobs. They filed a motion to extend their answering brief deadline by 30 more days. They deadline for their first extension was yesterday. So far the court has not ruled on the 2nd extension request and opposing counsel did not write their answering brief by the deadline. Is all of this standard practice? Meaning the court not responded to a motion to extend a deadline till after the deadline.

​

We have been involved in a cross-state visitation rights case for over a year. During that time, both parties have filed numerous motions and responses with the courts. Recently, just as it appeared my case might finally be heard, the opposing party contacted Child Protective Services and made false allegations that one of my children was abusing a younger sibling and step-siblings.

It is important to note that throughout more than a year of litigation, neither the opposing party nor their counsel has ever raised any allegations of abuse—either to me or to the courts. There is no history of abuse of any kind.

As a result of this report, my daughter was pulled out of class last week to be interviewed by an investigator. During the interview, the investigator asked questions about her former stepmother and stepsister, making it fairly clear that, although the report was labeled “anonymous,” it likely originated from the opposing party. My daughter answered truthfully, explained her relationship to those individuals, and clearly stated that she feels safe and has no concerns about her household.

After speaking with my daughter, the investigator contacted me and explained the nature of the anonymous report made the previous night. The investigator indicated that if I declined further interviews for myself and my other child, the case would likely be closed based on my daughter’s statements and the absence of any safety concerns.

While I understand the report was technically anonymous, the circumstances strongly suggest it came from the opposing party. This situation is deeply concerning. My daughter was unnecessarily removed from class and subjected to questioning, and false allegations were made about my other child. After more than a year of litigation with no prior claims of abuse, it is unacceptable that such allegations would be introduced at this stage rather than raised earlier, if there had been any legitimate concern.

What, if anything, can I do about a false report like this? I am particularly concerned about the impact on my children and the apparent use of this tactic so late in the litigation process.