• Report: #107998

Complaint Review: Oscar Delahoya

Thank You

Read how Ripoff Report saves consumers millions.

  • Submitted: Sun, September 12, 2004
  • Updated: Fri, October 01, 2004

  • Reported By:anaheim hills California
Oscar Delahoya
637 W. 5th Street #6700 Los Angeles, California U.S.A.

Oscar Delahoya Tried to give is child away DEAD BEAT DAD "golden boy" boxing champion Los Angeles California

*Consumer Comment: The mother has full legal custody! Child support is the law!

*Consumer Comment: Give His Child Away?

What's this?
What's this?
What's this?
Is this
Ripoff Report
About you?
Ripoff Report
A business' first
line of defense
on the Internet.
If your business is
willing to make a
commitment to
customer satisfaction
Click here now..

Does your business have a bad reputation?
Fix it the right way.
Corporate Advocacy Program™

SEO Reputation Management at its best!

The transcript below clearly describes how Oscar Delahoya wanted to give away his child.

(Before the Honorable Joyce M. Reikes - Department F-4)

THE COURT; Let me call the Desbrow matter now

MR. SCHUSTER: If I can announce my appearance, Dennis

Schuster appearing on behalf of respondent who is present with counsel.

MRS. RIOS: Delilah Knox Rios for the petitioner who's
present in court.

MS.BLUM: Stephanie Blum from Nachsin & Weston
representing the father Mr. Oscar De La Hoya. Not present in court.

THE COURT: Thank you. And in the absence of an
objection, I'll hear this matter as the temporary judge. The parties have not been sworn, so we need to

MR. SCHUSTER: Well, if I can just bring the Court up to
date as to what's happening --

THE COURT: I remember seeing you in chambers, I think,
the last time you were in. Let me see if I can -- all right.
That was an OSC re child custody and visitation, and it was put over until today.

MR. SCHUSTER: Really, your Honor, what had happened the
last time we were in front of your Honor, you had heard my motion to set aside the default that had been entered against my client. You set it aside. Parallel to that, we also had my client's order to show cause for custody and visitation. You were concerned, and you set it over to today's date, one, to allow opposing counsel to file her amended petition changing date of separation. We have filed our response. It's my understanding she would like to take bifurcation of status today. You had wanted me to see how we intended to proceed in light of the fact that there is a judgment of paternity that parallels this matter, having analyzed this, your Honor, my request is that today the Court specially set a trial date as to
the specific issue of date of separation. The original date of separation would have made my client conclusively the father at the minor child if you allow an amendment to the petition so that the date of separation was prior to the conception of the minor child. Issues of custody and visitation,support, I think are...

THE COURT: Excuse me Pm sorry to interrupt Mr. Schuster, but as I understand it, the reason you wish to challenge the date of separation is strictly for the issue of paternity.

MR. SCHUSTER: Yes, your Honor, that's right.

THE COURT: All right. There's already a judgment of
paternity. That judgment stands It was judicated. It's no longer an Issue. It's not an issue. Once there's a judgment, a judgment is a judgment is a judgment. If you want to move to have that judgment set aside by the Court that issued it, that's a whole different ball game and not one that I'm involved with today. But I am not going to set a trial. I think it's inappropriate to set a trial date to challenge the date of separation only for the purpose of--if there were other purposes, that's a different ball game. But only for the purpose of challenging or otherwise disparaging a judgment that has otherwise been fairly entered and I think that's inappropriate. I'm not going to do that.

MR. SCHUSTER: What I would ask the Court to do of-course that would be a trial matter, the date of separation. My client obviously was not joined to the particular judgment in question so he was not a party to that, either to enter an objection or

THE COURT: Then he has to challenge that judgment in front of the Court that entered it.

MR. SCHUSTER: I understand that, your Honor.

THE COURT: And so that's not my that's not an issue before me today, challenging that

MR. SCHUSTER: I'm not asking you to challenge the judgment. It was just we're going to challenge the judgment and they're going to say, "What's the basis of your challenge?" And we're going to say, "Date of separation" And they're going to say, Why don't you go back to the family law court, go in
front of that judge in the divorce matter and have her decide
what the date of separation is.

THE COURT: Once again, I think that's up to the Court that entered. the judgment. What I do recall is a statement made by the father, Mr. Oscar Delahoya who is not in court today, still, he is the father. He indicated that he would be happy to give up his rights. Stop me if I'm wrong. The father said he'd be happy to give up his rights if that were what the parties desired. I don't know whether that factors into this at all, whether you talked with Mr. De La Hoya's council--

MR. SCHUSTER: I have not discussed that matter with opposing counsel. I didn't know that.

THE COURT: You were in the room when they said it.

MR. SCHUSTER: No, no, I know that. Exactly, your Honor. It was my understanding as to how it was to be done procedurally.

THE COURT: If you want to discuss that, certainly you
can do that today. You're all here.

MS. BLUM: My client has no intention of getting involved in this matter. This does not involve him.

THE COURT: I understand. However, this does involve his child.

MS. RIOS: your Honor, my client has no intention of having this child raised by a father who is not the father. If the father of the child wants the child signed over that's-

THE COURT: Well, then that's something all three of you have to work out. I'm not getting into it. Technically, it's not an issue before me today. So what I have before me today is an order to show cause re custody and visitation on - Unfortunately, I've had no opportunity to review the file, and I apologize for that. Even more so, I note that there was a mediation appointment back on January 30th and one party attended and petitioner did not attend.

MS. RIOS: Yes, your Honor. We discussed that last time. My client was ill that day, and you did not order a new mediation date. You wanted to see if counsel was actually going to attack the other judgment or not.

THE COURT: If he wants to attack it, he's going to have
to attack it in that court and that court can determine date of separation as well I can. Certainly, it's not appropriate for me

Tiffany
San Bernardino, California
U.S.A.

Click here to read other Rip Off Reports on Dead Beat Dads and Moms

This report was posted on Ripoff Report on 09/12/2004 02:05 AM and is a permanent record located here: http://www.ripoffreport.com/r/Oscar-Delahoya/Los-Angeles-California-92011/Oscar-Delahoya-Tried-to-give-is-child-away-DEAD-BEAT-DAD-golden-boy-boxing-champion-Los-107998. The posting time indicated is Arizona local time. Arizona does not observe daylight savings so the post time may be Mountain or Pacific depending on the time of year.

Ripoff Report has an exclusive license to this report. It may not be copied without the written permission of Ripoff Report.

Click Here to read other Ripoff Reports on Oscar Delahoya

Search for additional reports

If you would like to see more Rip-off Reports on this company/individual, search here:

Search Tips
Report & Rebuttal
Respond to this report!
What's this?
Also a victim?
What's this?
Repair Your Reputation!
What's this?
REBUTTALS & REPLIES:
0Author 2Consumer 0Employee/Owner
Updates & Rebuttals

#1 Consumer Comment

The mother has full legal custody! Child support is the law!

AUTHOR: Jenny - (U.S.A.)

I know some find this hard to understand, I will try to clear it up for the person who thinks this is about adoption.
I am the Childs aunt I have listened to this little boy ask to see his father (Oscar) many times. It should be noted the person in which Oscar would like to give parental rights is not a "nice family" as mentioned in the last Report. He is the Ex-husband who has a long history of drug use as well as a child of his own to which he never paid a dime in child support.

It is not adoption because the mother has full legal custody, as well as physical custody of the boy. Mr. Delahoya can not just say "hey I don't want to pay support based on my income, but I will pay this drug user to take my place then he can pay based on his income".

Bottom line is this child is the son of a man who claims to care about children. He gives millions away every year to children who have fathers just like himself. Losers who want to play and not pay. (Child support)!!!!
It seems a little ignorant to say this is about the mother wanting money. Should he not take care of his own child first?
On Oscar's behalf, as to date he does pay his child support. He put some money in a trust and every month it generates interest. The interest is then paid to the mother as child support. Oscar will not miss a dime. He gets the money used to generate interest back after his obligations to his son are up. As for why he doesn't even want to do that? I do not know perhaps he is just a mean ass like the one your probably with now.
We love you guys.
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#2 Consumer Comment

Give His Child Away?

AUTHOR: Pamela - (U.S.A.)

SO WHAT! It's called ADOPTION! You sounds like a groupie who tried to trap him! You're the dead beat! Making babies to keep a man or just to get some money! Lots of nice families adopt!
Respond to this report!
What's this?
Report & Rebuttal
Respond to this report!
What's this?
Also a victim?
What's this?
Repair Your Reputation!
What's this?

Advertisers above have met our
strict standards for business conduct.



Ripoff Report Legal Directory