Durant, Lies & Fee Waivers
"A single lie discovered is enough to create doubt in every truth expressed."
​"The sheriff only serves DVRO's."
Nevada County Commissioner Yvette Durant
Commissioner Durant's denial of waiver of the fee to have the sheriff personally serve Kathy (i.e. "give notice") is signifcant due to: (1) there not being good cause or reason for Durant to deny me the waiver (I was granted the waiver on a previous and subsequent request),  (2)  Durant had to go to the length of lying and misrepresenting the law and my motion in order to deny me the waiver, (3) denying me the waiver (and the Truckee Police Department impounding Kathy's boyfriend's van) was key to Durant and Kathy conspiring to defraud my children out of guideline support which was needed to enable Kathy to continue to prostitute.

The purpose of this page is to show that Commissioner Durant is not creditable and that Durant’s denial of my request for waiver of the fee to have the sheriff give notice was nefarious and had the malicious intent described herein as evidenced by Durant perjuring herself, personally attacking me and misrepresenting facts and the law at the hearing.
​Fee Waiver
​Commissioner Durant's corruption was so obvious and egregious in denying me the waiver  I prepared and filed the declaration at the link above to document what transpired. I offer that the reason it was important for Durant to deny me the waiver was: (1) to increase my litigation costs, (2) it aided in delaying proceedings, (3) made it more difficult for me to timely file and have served motions, and (4) because delaying proceedings and increasing my costs increased the risk of me losing financial support to continue litigation.
Commissioner Durant behaved as  though she would be personally out-of-pocket if I was granted waiver of the $40 fee to have the sheriff give notice, which  I am certain was the case in that there must be a benefit to Durant for her to accept the risks associated with being a corrupt public servant.
Below are the statements Commissioner Durant made during the hearing that were perjurious, personally attacking and misrepresented facts and the law. As a practicing attorney for more than 20 years and a family law commissioner since 2011, there is no possibility that Durant didn't know that her statements were untrue and fraudulent, once again begging the question of motivation.
  1. "The sheriff only serves DVRO's!" - This perjurious lie is a misrepresentation of law and so obviously untrue that it is perhaps the most incriminating event for Commissioner Durant during my entire divorce proceedings. The  sheriff can give required notice for any document in a legal proceeding before a Superior Court, and the sheriff doesn't even charge a fee to give notice for Domestic Violence Restraining Orders (DVRO's).  During the hearing I even pointed out to Durant that the sheriff has served motions for requests for orders on Kathy in the past. For Commissioner Durant to lie by saying that the sheriff only gives notice for DVRO's was absurd.
  2. "The court can't waive the fees of a private company." -This statement was a misrepresentation of fact and again, it was absurd for Durant to say it. The forms very specifically provide for waiver of only the sheriff's fee to serve papers and make no mention of a private company. I did not at any time in writing or verbally request waiver of a private company’s fee, and the law does not and cannot force private companies to waive their fees. All things that Durant full well knew when she made this statement.
  3. "I don't know why you are obsessed with personal service." – Commissioner Durant made this personal attack during my argument for being granted the waiver when it started becoming more difficult for her to defend not granting me the waiver.
  4. "We are not talking about this anymore” - This statement ended the hearing. Apparently having realized that my argument to be granted the waiver was valid and if Durant continued she would subject herself to further incrimination, the only thing Commissioner Durant had left to do was to walk out of the courtroom which is what she abruptly did.
Durant defended her denial of only the sheriff notice fee waiver by telling me that it was Kathy’s problem if she did not accept mail service, not mine, and that I could take my divorce to completion using only mail service. When I tried to point out that due to Kathy’s chronic bad faith I would need personal service to file for contempt Durant talked over me to shut me up and ridiculed me for speaking which was a common tactic used by Durant throughout the proceedings.

Durant not granting me the waiver of the fee for the sheriff to give notice benefited Kathy by:
  • creating time barriers to make it difficult for me to meet filing deadlines. Living 500 miles from the courthouse in Truckee required me to mail motions to the court to be filed, receive them back and then serve Kathy by mail which requires 5 days be added to the notice period. As a result, it took me a minimum of a month to serve Kathy. This became a significant issue as trial approached, and with Durant suspiciously denying me a trial continuance and was a key factor in me not being able to complete discovery and denying me the use of legal remedies to compel Kathy to respond to discovery requests. See
Denied Discovery
  • contributing to delaying the proceedings which risked me losing the financial ability to continue litigation by upsetting my father who continually threatened to kick my children and me out of his house due to the money he kept having to loan me and being frustrated that my divorce was being dragged out. Kathy was very well aware of this and she and Karl continually harassed my father to intentionally set him off by lying and making up excuses to call him, often drunk and with Karl on the phone. I asked Kathy to stop what I told her was elder abuse which she refused to do. As an aside, Kathy once blamed me for my divorce being prolonged to my father by telling him it was because my motions had errors in them coincidently right after Durant nit-picked at length my motion at a hearing for the first and only time.