Judge Tyrie Boyer will go out of his way to schedule unneeded hearings regarding money – even when it has been resolved among the parties – and yet will delay for years in enforcing an entire agreement and do gymnastics to attempt to do so.  What is it about money that seems to motivate this Judge?  Why does he value money more than children when he is a family law judge?

When you have an apparent mental midget for a judge, these are the types of rulings you get.

 

edit: After Judge Tyrie Boyer scheduled a hearing (that was unneeded as it had been handled previously by the attorneys) on money, he still hasn’t gone ahead and scheduled anything regarding children more than half a year later. Why does Tyrie Boyer think that money is more important than children? What kind of character do you have if you are supposed to be a family law judge and yet prioritize this way?

Others have accused Boyer of “trying to buy a judicial seat because Boyer has put $150,000 of his own money into his campaign account”.  Was it about money and power for Boyer instead of enforcing agreements and putting children welfare first?  We don’t know, but we do know that in cases before him his actions show him putting money before children.

 

In Judge Tyrie Boyers courtroom, a document that says something clear appears to be treated as optional:

…If any of the children spend overnight in a place other than their usual place of abode, it is the obligation of the parent who is in charge of them at the time to provide to the other parent the address and telephone number…

Judge Boyer appears to not care what the parties have agreed to, and has the apparent unprofessionalism to ignore the law to enforce his own views.

We wonder how clowns like this are Judges?

What do you think language like the following means in Judge Tyrie Boyer’s courtroom:

…Each party shall communicate to the other party the children’s medical and dental appointment…

In Judge Boyer’s courtroom, that kind of language appears to make the notification optional. Such behavior goes on for years, and Judge Tyrie Boyer laughs away at his own inexperience.

It is bad enough to have a Judge like that in a regular case, but in cases involving children, it is just unprofessional and sad to have a Judge behave that way.

You know, I haven’t been doing this family law stuff except for three days, but — and frankly, let me tell you, I truly believe in psychoanalysis. (laughing).

 

What Judge thinks it is funny that he is completely inexperienced in an area of law and then laughs about it?  And then to make matters worse, what kind of judge will then stop professionals from testifying?

One finds it difficult to tell if Judge Tyrie Boyer has a reading compression problem, an inability to understand his job, an inability to recall what he has learned from law school and practice, or a sexist bias. Or perhaps Tyrie Boyer has some combination of these.

When a document that has been approved by a Judge that says:
“in all respects not modified, the provisions of the Final Judgment and Marital Settlement Agreement remain in full force and effect”

What would a reasonably intelligent person think that means? It seems very straightforward, right?  If something is not change, it remains in effect.  It is quite clear and straightforward, unless you have some bias or intellectual issue that necessitates Judge Boyer twisting the words to suit another purpose. This is what Judge Tyrie Boyer had to say about the matter:

Since the agreement had not “reimposed that particular type of language” it was not included in a modification, despite the fact that the provisions remain in full force.

So, because a modification did not include all the original language, Judge Boyer believes thatanything not included was no longer part of the agreement, despite being specifically included.  If something was important, it would have been restated despite the language including it.  Incredible isn’t it? Could there be a bias here against men? Could it just be that Judge Boyer has a problem reading or comprehending the English language?  What does Judge Boyer teach his students at Florida Coastal School of Law?

According to Judge Tyrie Boyer, any provisions that were important would have been included in the modification if they were meant to be continued.   Given that the modification referenced did not include provisions for child support, would Judge Tyrie Boyer seriously argue that it was no longer in force?  What about other provisions that were referenced for inclusion but not specifically specified?  There were lots of provisions not included.  Are they now no longer enforceable in Judge Boyer’s courtroom?  Of course not, Judge Tyrie Boyer’s sexist bias against men would not permit it.

Judge Tyrie Boyer is more than willing to enforce parts of an agreement, but either through lack of skills or lack of nerve is unwilling to enforce entire agreements.

It is difficult to tell whether Judge Boyer is merely biased or lacks any legal reasoning skills, but clearly he has trouble parsing legal language.  His legal reasoning is often an incoherent, inconsistent mess.