Discovery procedure for child and spousal support in California

Discovery procedure for child and spousal support in California
Discovery procedure for child and spousal support in California.

The discovery procedure for child and spousal support in California is the topic of this blog post.

This blog post will discuss the discovery procedure for child and spousal support in California. The discovery procedure for child and spousal support allows you to serve a request for income and expense information from the other party before you file a request for order to modify or terminate an order for child, family or spousal support in California.

Statutory authorization for the discovery procedure for child and spousal support in California.

The statutory authorization for the discovery procedure for child and spousal support in California is found in Chapter 6, Article 2 of the California Family Code, specifically sections 3660 through 3668.

To read the entire text of Family Code sections 3660 through 3668 use the link shown below:

https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displayText.xhtml?lawCode=FAM&division=9.&title=&part=1.&chapter=6.&article=2.

These statutes allow a party to serve a request for an income and expense declaration on the other party before they file a request for order or notice of motion to modify or terminate child, family or spousal support in California.

Judicial council form for the discovery procedure for child and spousal support in California.

The form used to obtain the income and expense information is mandatory Judicial Council Form FL-396-Request for Production of an Income and Expense Declaration After Judgment which you can download here: Judicial Council Form FL-396

The purpose of these statutes is to permit parties to obtain inexpensive discovery of facts before the commencement of a proceeding for modification or termination of an order for child, family, or spousal support, pursuant to Family Code section 3660.

These statutes provide the only legally authorized method of discovery before filing any request for order or notice of motion to modify or terminate child, family or spousal support in California. Other methods of discovery may only be used if a motion is pending pursuant to Family Code section 3662.

In the absence of a pending motion for modification or termination of a support order, a request for discovery using this method can only be served once every 12 months, pursuant to Family Code section 3663.

Service of a request for production of an income and expense declaration shall be by certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, to the last known address of the party to be served, or by personal service pursuant to subdivision f of Family Code section 3664.  Note that the code does not require service of the request on the attorney of record for the other party, however in my personal opinion it is a good idea to mail a courtesy copy to them assuming that they are still the attorney of record just to show the Court that you have given them notice as well.

The responding party must complete the income and expense declaration as well as provide a copy of their prior year’s federal and state personal income tax returns that shall be attached to the income and expense declaration pursuant to Family Code section 3665.

The discovery procedure for child and spousal support in California detailed in this blog post is the best and least expensive way to obtain income and expense information from the opposing party before commencing a modification or termination proceeding for child, family or spousal support. This procedure is the only method that can be used before commencing any modification or termination proceeding. It truly does provide an inexpensive method of obtaining the facts necessary to determine whether or not to commence a modification or termination proceeding.

 

Over 300 sample legal documents for California and Federal litigation for sale.

To view more information on over 300 sample legal documents for California and Federal litigation visit: https://legaldocspro.myshopify.com/products

The author of this blog post, Stan Burman, is an entrepreneur and retired litigation paralegal that worked in California and Federal litigation from January 1995 through September 2017 and has created over 300 sample legal documents for sale. He believes in Father’s Rights as he has seen first-hand the incredible bias against fathers in the family law courts in California. He is currently working on creating digital products that will assist fathers both in California and throughout the United States to represent themselves without an attorney in Court regarding custody and support issues.

Follow Fathers rights on Twitter at:

https://twitter.com/Fathersrights16

Follow Fathers rights on Facebook at:

https://www.facebook.com/Fathersrights10/

DISCLAIMER:

Please note that the author of this blog post, Stan Burman is NOT an attorney and as such is unable to provide any specific legal advice. The author is NOT engaged in providing any legal, financial, or other professional services, and any information contained in this blog post is NOT intended to constitute legal advice.

The materials and information contained in this blog post have been prepared by Stan Burman for informational purposes only and are not legal advice. Transmission of the information contained in this blog post is not intended to create, and receipt does not constitute, any business relationship between the author and any readers. Readers should not act upon this information without seeking professional counsel.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Modifying child custody and visitation in California

Modifying child custody and visitation in California
Modifying child custody and visitation in California.

Modifying child custody and visitation in California is the topic of this blog post.

Several California statutes and California Supreme Court and Court of Appeal cases outline the standards used and the burden of proof on the party seeking an order modifying child custody and visitation in California.

Laws governing modifying child custody and visitation in California.

The law in California states that child custody and visitation orders generally are modifiable throughout the child’s minority whenever the court finds a modification is “necessary or proper” in the child’s best interests. See Family Code § 3022.

In California, in child custody/visitation matters and child support, the family law court has continuing jurisdiction and the matter thus remains pending even after entry of the underlying dissolution (or legal separation or nullity) judgment.

In at least two published cases the California Supreme Court has stated that although the statutes governing custody adjudications only requires courts to ascertain the child’s best interest, the best interest standard has an added twist once a “final” judicial custody determination is in place: A party seeking to modify a “permanent” custody order can do so only upon a showing of a significant change of circumstances so affecting the child that modification is essential to the child’s welfare. Absent such a showing, any modification would be an abuse of discretion as denying the child the benefits of a stable home environment and thus would not be in his or her best interest.

In California, the trial court’s exercise of discretion is far more limited when it effects a change in existing custody orders than when it makes an initial custody decision.

Appellate courts are “less reluctant to find an abuse of discretion when custody is changed than when it is originally awarded, and reversals of such orders have not been uncommon.” Marriage of McLoren (1988) 202 Cal.App. 3d 108, 113, modification giving W joint legal custody (where original order gave H sole legal and physical custody) reversed because W failed to present proof of change of circumstances affecting children’s welfare.

Both the California Supreme Court and Courts of Appeal have stated that the “changed circumstances” rule is an adjunct of the statutory “best interests” test for determining child custody. See Family Code §§ 3011, 3040(b). It furthers the paramount goal of preserving the need for continuity and stability in custody arrangements, unless some significant change in circumstances indicates a different arrangement would be in the child’s best interest.

While the party seeking an order modifying child custody and visitation in California must make a showing of changed circumstances in many cases, there are exceptions to this rule that should be carefully considered and reviewed by any party contemplating requesting that the Court modify child custody and/or visitation orders in California.

For example the changed circumstances rule is triggered only after what is known as a “final” or “permanent” custody adjudication. The ordinary best interest standard, without the additional changed circumstances burden of proof applies when the court makes any initial custody adjudication, and when it adjudicates custody following any temporary or interim custody

However as the policy is not to discourage parties from entering into custody stipulations, any doubts about whether the parties intended a stipulated custody order to be a “final” or “permanent” custody adjudication will be resolved against finality and thus against application of the changed circumstances rule in subsequent proceedings to modify the stipulated order.

All indication is that, where the issue is disputed, a stipulated order will be deemed to be temporary or interim in nature unless it clearly states it is a final judgment as to custody or words to that effect. The order must affirmatively state that it is a final order.

In one case, a stipulated dissolution judgment awarded the parties’ joint legal custody, mother “primary physical custody” and father “reasonable visitation.” The judgment also recited, however, that “in the event the parties are unable to resolve their custody and visitation issues, they shall agree upon a therapist or counselor to assist them. If after meeting with a therapist or counselor, the parties remain unable to resolve their differences, they shall make an appointment with the Conciliation Court prior to either party filing a request with the Court for a hearing on the issue.” Despite other boilerplate language in the judgment stating it was intended to be a final settlement of the parties’ rights and obligations, there was no “clear, affirmative indication” that they intended the stipulated custody provision to be a final judicial custody determination. Quite the contrary, the stipulated language warranted “the opposite conclusion the parents disagreed and were attempting to resolve the custody and visitation issues.”

As to physical custody, the changed circumstances rule applies when the modification request seeks to remove custody from one parent and give it to the other. By contrast, no change of circumstances need be shown as a prerequisite to altering only the co-parenting schedule (the amount of time the child spends in each parent’s household) under a joint custody order. Proposed changes in parenting time are “not on a par with a request to change physical custody from sole to joint custody, or vice versa”; the only standard the moving parent must meet in such cases is the child’s best interest.

So long as the joint custody award itself is not being changed, the court has very broad discretion to revise the “coparenting residential arrangement” where the parents are unable to agree and call upon the court to intervene.

Despite what some people think, the changed circumstances rule does not apply when a parent requests only a modification of the visitation arrangement (whether in a joint custody or sole custody situation). Because such a modification does not change “custody,” the trial court considers a visitation modification solely under the child’s best interests standard.

Sample points and authorities in support of modifying child custody and visitation in California.

Attorneys or parties in California that would like to view a portion of a sample 13 page points and authorities in support of a request for an order modifying child custody and visitation in California containing brief instructions, a memorandum of points and authorities with citations to case law and statutory authority and sample declaration sold by the author can see below.

 

Over 300 sample legal documents for California and Federal litigation for sale.

To view more information on over 300 sample legal documents for California and Federal litigation visit: https://legaldocspro.myshopify.com/products

The author of this blog post, Stan Burman, is an entrepreneur and retired litigation paralegal that worked in California and Federal litigation from January 1995 through September 2017 and has created over 300 sample legal documents for sale. He believes in Father’s Rights as he has seen first-hand the incredible bias against fathers in the family law courts in California. He is currently working on creating digital products that will assist fathers both in California and throughout the United States to represent themselves without an attorney in Court regarding custody and support issues.

Follow Fathers rights on Twitter at:

https://twitter.com/Fathersrights16

Follow Fathers rights on Facebook at:

https://www.facebook.com/Fathersrights10/

DISCLAIMER:

Please note that the author of this blog post, Stan Burman is NOT an attorney and as such is unable to provide any specific legal advice. The author is NOT engaged in providing any legal, financial, or other professional services, and any information contained in this blog post is NOT intended to constitute legal advice.

The materials and information contained in this blog post have been prepared by Stan Burman for informational purposes only and are not legal advice. Transmission of the information contained in this blog post is not intended to create, and receipt does not constitute, any business relationship between the author and any readers. Readers should not act upon this information without seeking professional counsel.

 

 

 

 

 

The Reality of Paternity Fraud — Fighting Against Paternity Fraud

Man in Great Britain wins a $250,000 pound settlement for paternity fraud.

How Entertaining is Paternity Fraud? Far too often we find entertainment in the suffering of others, without so much as a thought to how the lives of those involved are effected. Paternity Fraud, the act of misleading a man and a child in to believing they are connected through a biological (genetic) bond, is one […]

via The Reality of Paternity Fraud — Fighting Against Paternity Fraud

Great blog post discussing paternity fraud. The laws need to be changed to allow men to either challenge a finding of paternity or revoke any declaration of paternity within three (3) years of discovering evidence that they have been the victim of paternity fraud.

What if the Shoe Were on The Other Foot?

The laws need to be changed to allow for lawsuits to be filed for damages resulting from paternity fraud, including damages for pain and suffering and punitive damages in appropriate cases where the evidence is clear that the paternity fraud was intentional.

Fighting Against Paternity Fraud

There is no scenario that can be concocted which can completely capture a full comparison of Paternity Fraud.  It is a matter of reality, that a man, no matter how hard he may try, cannot easily convince a woman that she is the mother of a child, which was in reality mothered by another woman.  Let’s face it, barring a coma, women are quite well aware of giving birth to a child.  Women are quite well aware of conceiving a child, they know they are pregnant, and they experience child birth.  Men on the other hand, well, they are left to trust the fact that they are in a relationship that has a reasonable expectation of trust, honesty, and commitment that will overpower any level of doubt as to whether they fathered the child their female partner is attributing his fatherhood to.

With that being said, the scenario to be…

View original post 1,311 more words

Man in Great Britain wins a £250,000 settlement for paternity fraud

Man in Great Britain wins a $250,000 pound settlement for paternity fraud.
Man in Great Britain wins a $250,000 pound settlement for paternity fraud.

A man in Great Britain wins a £250,000  settlement for paternity fraud.

Richard Mason received the £250,000 settlement from his ex-wife after he found out that she betrayed him for almost 20 years after he found out that he was not the biological father of her three sons as he had been infertile since birth.

Read the entire original article here:

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/8130171/man-receives-250k-payout-from-ex-wife-after-dna-test-reveals-he-is-not-the-father-of-her-three-sons-after-21-years/#comments

Stories like this one are the reason that any man that has any doubt whatsoever that he may not be the biological father of his children should research the laws in their state to determine how long they have to contest the finding of paternity and whether their state permits civil damages for paternity fraud.

This story is good news although there are very few states in the United States that have any penalty for paternity fraud which is outrageous.

Over 300 sample legal documents for California and Federal litigation for sale.

To view more information on over 300 sample legal documents for California and Federal litigation visit: https://legaldocspro.myshopify.com/products

The author of this blog, Stan Burman, is an entrepreneur and retired litigation paralegal that worked in California and Federal litigation from January 1995 through September 2017 and has created over 300 sample legal documents for sale. He believes in Father’s Rights as he has seen first-hand the incredible bias against fathers in the family law courts in California. He is currently working on creating digital products that will assist fathers both in California and throughout the United States to represent themselves without an attorney in Court regarding custody and support issues.

Follow Fathers rights on Twitter at:

https://twitter.com/Fathersrights16

Follow Fathers rights on Google Plus at:

https://plus.google.com/+Fathersrights

DISCLAIMER:

Please note that the author of this blog post, Stan Burman is NOT an attorney and as such is unable to provide any specific legal advice. The author is NOT engaged in providing any legal, financial, or other professional services, and any information contained in this blog post is NOT intended to constitute legal advice.

The materials and information contained in this blog post have been prepared by Stan Burman for informational purposes only and are not legal advice. Transmission of the information contained in this blog post is not intended to create, and receipt does not constitute, any business relationship between the author and any readers. Readers should not act upon this information without seeking professional counsel.

 

 

 

 

 

The Terrorised Child: The Ideological Distortion of Parenting — Karen Woodall

One of the themes which is bubbling up from the media reporting of parental alienation in recent weeks is the ideological viewpoint that children have the right to decide whether they are ‘keen on’ a parent or not. Accompanying this ideological viewpoint is a new phrase, which has also recently been seen bubbling up from […]

via The Terrorised Child: The Ideological Distortion of Parenting — Karen Woodall

 

Steve Ybarra’s Story, Domestic Violence

Having worked in California divorce and other family law cases for over 20 years I have worked on several cases where men were the victims of domestic violence.

I remember working on one case where the client proved with strong evidence that it was his wife that was inflicting domestic violence on him and still the Court Commissioner refused to order his wife to pay his attorney fees that he was forced to incur in defending against false domestic violence allegations.

WARNING: THE FOLLOWING CONTENT MAY BE DISTURBING TO SOME

Steve Ybarra is a Mexican-American man in his thirties who is going through a Domestic Violence situation with his ex, Michelle Ybarra. According to documentation through video, pictures, and witness testimony, Steve Ybarra has been a victim of his abuser for the past three years of their marriage. He is currently in the middle of a divorce and is in the middle of a custody battle of their young son, Leo.


Due to the video being so long, I’m writing out Ybarra’s story. You can watch the full video at the Bottom but it is long and the Microphone STINKS!


Ybarra got married to Michelle, who already had a child from a previous relationship. They were married for a little over three years, during at which time, his friend was telling him he was being abused. It took some time for…

View original post 481 more words