The Center for Children's Justice - Pennsylvania Chapter

Use the index above and the back button on your browser to easily navigate this website.

House lawyers step into lawmaker's child-support case
12/17/2004, 4:58 p.m. ET
The Associated Press  

HARRISBURG, Pa. (AP) — Lawyers hired by the state House of
Representatives have stepped into a lawmaker's child support case,
arguing that his banking and expense account records should be kept
private, a newspaper reported.

House lawyers say the records of Rep. Mark S. McNaughton, R-Dauphin,
are constitutionally protected. They have asked a Dauphin County
Court judge to quash a subpoena by his estranged wife to view them,
The Patriot-News of Harrisburg reported in Friday's editions.

Critics contended that a member of the public would have no such
protection and that the House should not be spending taxpayer funds
to defend McNaughton.

"Suppose the guy was a plumber," said Cliff Rieders, the former
president of the Pennsylvania Trial Lawyers Association. "She'd be
entitled to his expense records. So why should it be any different
because he happens to be in the Legislature?"

McNaughton has accumulated a $39,490 child support debt and is
appealing a July 2003 county order to pay Diane McNaughton $3,642 a
month to support their three children.

The couple were married in 1985, and Diane McNaughton filed for
divorce in February 2003. Currently, $2,089 is taken out of
McNaughton's monthly pay, and he says he cannot afford more,
according to court filings. McNaughton earns $72,565 as a lawmaker.

Both Diane and Mark McNaughton declined comment.

Attorneys from the Philadelphia firm of Stradley Ronon Stevens &
Young have been retained by the House and they contend that both the
U.S. and state constitutions protect lawmakers from having to testify
in court procedures or submit written materials.

Robert F. Williams, a constitutional law professor at Rutgers
University in New Jersey, said the Pennsylvania Supreme Court ruled
last year that a state legislator's telephone records were not
protected from a request by media outlets.

"If telephone records aren't protected ... then why would any of this
that's being requested?" Williams said.
 

Any questions?  Any complaints?
Do you want to tell your story?
Please feel free to send your comments via e-mail to

You must type this address into your e-mail software.  The link has been removed due to overwhelming spam.

This web site is strictly for your information about what is happening in our state; Pennsylvania.  Information and opinions on this website are NOT "legal" advice but ARE friendly advice from people who have been through the local domestic relations office and are very familiar with the crimes against humanity that office is getting away with strictly for PROFIT at the expense of fathers and their children.  Feel free to copy and repost any information on this site unless said information is credited to a web site other than Pennsylvania Family Court Reform (this website).  In this case, you must ask permission from the author, and since it's been our experience that most of the people that support our cause are good people, they most likely won't have a problem with it.  It's time to reclaim our state and our rights as Americans that are being trampled and ignored by a select portion of our state government, who's sole interest is PROFIT from federal grants for "child support" collection, at our expense... our JUDICIAL branch.