Model essay on retrial defense

Legal analysis: model essay on retrial defense: Respondent: date of birth, address and telephone number:. Respondent (retrial applicant): The respondent and the retrial applicant applied for retrial because of the dispute of changing custody, and now the defense is as follows: (No.The civil judgment made by the Intermediate People's Court of tongren city, Guizhou Province on, found that the facts were clear and the applicable law was correct, and it was not improper to revoke the judgment of first instance and change the judgment that the second son was raised by the respondent. The reasons for retrial applicants to apply for retrial are unfounded in law and should be rejected according to law. 1. The reasons for the respondent's application for retrial are untenable. The first reason is that the cited law is misunderstood by the respondent. The relationship between the respondent and the respondent is not a marriage relationship in the legal sense, but a cohabitation relationship that is not protected by law. What the court is asked to solve is the problem of child custody and property division, not the problem of dissolution of marriage, so the legal provisions cited by the defendant cannot be applied to the problem of child custody and property division. Second, during cohabitation, * * * has two sons, and it is reasonable for each to have one. If everyone lives with the respondent, it is obviously unfair to the respondent. Thirdly, because she gave birth to two sons, the respondent was sterilized, but the respondent was not sterilized. Citing article 3 1 of the Supreme People's Court's Several Specific Opinions on People's Courts Handling Divorce Cases, the Court of Final Appeal ruled that it was absolutely correct, legal and reasonable to change the dependency relationship and let the respondent raise his youngest son. The respondent can't violate the provisions of the above-mentioned laws when purchasing an ecological resettlement house for his son based on his own raising ability. 4. The applicant is in good health, has the ability to work, and has found a job that suits him. He came from other places to work in his hometown to take care of his son. So far, there is no problem of not being able to support his son. In a word, the judgment of the court of final appeal is correct, reasonable and legal, and the defendant's complaint is unreasonable and should be rejected according to law. Respondent: 20xx 165438+ 10/7.

Legal basis: Article 200 of the Civil Procedure Law of People's Republic of China (PRC), if the application of a party meets one of the following circumstances, the people's court shall try again: (1) there is new evidence enough to overturn the original judgment or ruling; (two) the basic facts identified in the original judgment or ruling lack evidence to prove; (3) The main evidence of the facts ascertained in the original judgment or ruling is forged; (four) the main evidence of the facts identified in the original judgment or ruling has not been cross-examined; (five) the main evidence needed for the trial of the case, the parties can not collect it by themselves due to objective reasons, and apply in writing to the people's court for investigation and collection, but the people's court has not investigated and collected it; (6) The application of the law in the original judgment or ruling is indeed wrong; (seven) the composition of the judicial organization is illegal or the judges who should be avoided according to law have not avoided; (8) A person without capacity for litigation has no legal representative, or a party who should participate in the litigation fails to participate in the litigation due to reasons not attributable to him or his agent ad litem. (nine) in violation of the law, depriving the parties of the right to debate; (ten) without a summons, the judgment is made by default; (eleven) the original judgment or ruling omitted or exceeded the claim; (twelve) the legal documents on which the original judgment or ruling was based have been revoked or changed; (thirteen) the judge has corruption, bribery, favoritism, perverting the law in the trial of the case.