- 8 -
that it may affect the disposition of his child custody
dispute with her in their pending divorce action.
Declaration Exhibit Y.
The declaration of Williams was attached to respondent’s motion,
but there was no declaration from Stewart. Exhibit Y was an
unsigned printout of a “case history” of petitioner and
Ms. Holloway. Because petitioner disputed the completeness of
the administrative record and the factual assertions made,
including his alleged admissions to Stewart concerning his
receipt of notice of the claims of Ms. Holloway, respondent’s
motion for summary judgment was denied. Respondent did not call
any witnesses at trial.
Although respondent repeats in the briefs the allegations of
statements made to Stewart and claims that those statements are
admissions and exceptions to the hearsay rule, there is no
evidence that petitioner made the statements to Stewart.
Petitioner denies making the statements, though not under oath.
Thus, there is no admissible evidence in the record as to whether
the statements were made or not made. For the reasons explained
below, we conclude that the disputed admissions are irrelevant to
our decision.
Respondent also argues that we are bound by the
administrative record in this case, notwithstanding petitioner’s
disputes about omissions from and inadequacy of the
administrative record. Because no testimony was offered at
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 10, 2007