Reducing child support payments in California

Reducing child support payments in California
Reducing child support payments in California.

Reducing child support payments in California is the topic of this blog post.

Any request for an order reducing child support payments in California requires that a request for order or notice of motion be filed and served unless a stipulation and order is signed by both parties and filed with the Court.

Statutory authority for reducing child support payments in California.

The statutory authority for reducing child support payments in California is found in California Family Code section 3651(a) which states that “A support order may be modified at any time as the Court determines to be necessary.”

Grounds for reducing child support payments in California.

The general rule in California is that a material change of circumstances must be shown before child support can be modified either upward or downward.

California law states that both parents of a minor child are equally responsible to support the minor child in California.  “The father and mother of a minor child have an equal responsibility to support their child in the manner suitable to the child’s circumstances.” See Family Code § 3900.  This rule applies to both original orders for child support and modifications.

The California Courts of Appeal have stated in published decisions that that an order reducing child support payments in California can issue in cases where there is an increase in the amount of time the child spends in the obligor parent’s custody such as increased visitation. This is allowable under the theory that all or part of the day-to-day needs of the minor child are being discharged directly by the obligor parent.

Both case and statutory law in California state that the parents’ actual earnings are not necessarily controlling on the question of ability to pay.  “The court may, in its discretion, consider the earning capacity of a parent in lieu of the parents’ income, consistent with the best interests of the children.”  Family Code § 4058(b).

Thus in appropriate situations a California Court can consider the earning capacity of a parent instead of that parent’s actual income.  Appropriate cases would be where the other parent is capable of working despite claiming to be unemployed or underemployed but refuses to work, or the income of the other parent has increased substantially since the date of the last support order.  A deliberate attempt to avoid child support obligations is not required.

And the California Courts of Appeal and the California Supreme Court have held that the only restriction imposed by the California child support statutes is that consideration of earning capacity be consistent with the best interests of the minor child.

In one case decided by a California Court of Appeal the Court of Appeal found no abuse of discretion in refusing to change the monthly income figure of the wife to zero where the facts in the case clearly showed that she quit work upon remarrying but she presented no evidence of any inability to find replacement employment or that her loss of income was otherwise justifiable under the facts in that case.

In another California Court of Appeal case the Court found that the husband had the opportunity to work and imputed income to him on the grounds that he was an attorney who could apply his skills and training to produce income.

If you are considering requesting an order reducing child support payments in California you should be sure to include enough facts and evidence to show a material change of circumstances since the date of the last child support order.

Sample points and authorities to request an order reducing child support payments in California for sale.

Attorneys or parties in California who would like to view a portion of a sample points and authorities in support of a request for an order reducing child support payments in California that is 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 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.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Child custody definitions in California

Child custody definitions in California
Child custody definitions in California.

Child custody definitions in California are the topic of this blog post.

This blog post will provide basic information on child custody definitions in California.

Joint Legal Custody:

Joint legal custody means that both parents have the authority to make important decisions regarding the child’s health, education, welfare, religion, driver’s license, etc. In some cases a judge will give parents joint legal custody, but not joint physical custody.

Joint legal custody means both parents share the responsibility in making important decisions in their child’s lives, but live with one parent most of the time. In most situations, the parent that does not have physical custody has visitation with the children.

Parents with legal custody have the right to make decisions regarding:

Parents with legal custody have the right to make decisions regarding:

School or childcare

Religious activities or institutions

Psychiatric, psychological, or other mental health counseling or therapy needs

Doctor, dentist, orthodontist, or other health professional (except in emergency situations)

Sports, summer camp, vacation, or extracurricular activities

Travel

Where to live

Joint Physical Custody:

Joint physical custody means that each parent has significant periods of physical custody, although parents can share joint custody even if the timeshares are unequal. For example, one parent may alternate a weekend schedule and the other parent has the child the rest of the time.

Legal Custody:

Legal custody means that the parent that has legal custody has decision-making authority for issues with health, education, and welfare of a child. When both parents share this responsibility it is referred to as “Joint Legal Custody.”  When only one parent has this responsibility, it is referred to as “Sole Legal Custody.”

Physical Custody:

Physical custody means that the parent or parents have the physical responsibility for the care of the child. Physical custody can be joint physical custody or sole physical custody.

Primary Physical Custody:

Some attorneys avoid the use of either “sole custody” or “joint custody” and use the term “primary physical custody” to designate the parent who has day-to day care of the child.

However I want to stress that the child custody laws in California do NOT recognize the term “primary physical custody” as the California Supreme Court has stated that the term “`primary physical custody'” is not found in the Family Code, which instead distinguishes between “`[j]oint physical custody'” (§ 3004) and “`[s]ole physical custody'” (§ 3007). See In re Marriage of LaMusga (2004) 32 Cal.4th 1072, 1081, fn. 1; see also In re Marriage of Richardson (2002) 102 Cal.App.4th 941, 945, fn. 2 (“Though frequently employed, the term `primary physical custody’ has no legal meaning.”.)

Using the term primary physical custody in any marital settlement agreement, or stipulated judgment or order can have negative consequences under certain circumstances such as move-away cases where one parent wants to move with the minor children to another city or state.

Sole Legal Custody:

Sole legal custody means that one parent is able to make all decisions regarding the child’s health, education, welfare, religion, driver’s license, etc.

Sole Physical Custody:

Sole physical custody means that one parent will have the physical custody of the child the great majority of the time, as well as responsibility for day-to-day care of the child.

Visitation:

If one parent has physical custody, the other parent is referred to as having visitation with the child.

Attorneys or parties in California that would like to view a portion of a sample stipulation and order for child custody and visitation in California created 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 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.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Opposing an OSC for contempt in a California divorce

Opposing an OSC for contempt in a California divorce
Opposing an OSC for contempt in a California divorce.

Opposing an OSC for contempt in a California divorce is the topic of this blog post.

Opposing an OSC for contempt in a California divorce is very important and any opposition to an OSC for contempt in California family law should be filed and served at least nine (9) Court days before the hearing pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 1005.

If you have been served with an order to show cause for contempt in California the first thing you should do is to carefully review the order to show cause and supporting affidavit to determine what grounds for opposition exist.

Grounds for Opposing an OSC for contempt in a California divorce.

Possible grounds for opposing an OSC for contempt in a California divorce would include situations where the alleged child support arrearages first became due more than three (3) years ago. Therefore any child support amounts that are alleged to be owed that became due more than three (3) years ago are barred by the statute of limitations found in Code of Civil Procedure § 1218.5(b) which states in pertinent part that, “If the contempt alleged is the failure to pay child, family, or spousal support, the period of limitations for commencing a contempt action is three years from the date that the payment was due”.

And if you were truly unable to pay the child support or comply with another Court order and can prove that by a preponderance of the evidence you should not be held in contempt.

Other possible grounds could include a case where the other party is alleging that you violated a Court order other than an order to pay support. In that case any alleged violations that occurred more than two (2) years ago are barred by the statute of limitations found in Code of Civil Procedure § 1218.5(b) which states in pertinent part that, “A contempt action to enforce any other order made under the Family Code must be brought within two years “from the time that the alleged contempt occurred.”

You may also be entitled to what are known as “Jackson credits” towards any alleged child support arrearages for the period of time that the minor child or children physically resided with you as you are considered to have directly discharged your support obligation to the minor children.

Your opposition should contain a declaration stating the facts that support your affirmative defenses including any exhibits that support your affirmative defenses.

Remember that the party that filed the order to show cause for contempt must prove to the Court that you are guilty of contempt beyond a reasonable doubt. However you are only required to prove your affirmative defenses by a preponderance of the evidence in order to prevail in Court.

Sample opposition for opposing an OSC for contempt in a California divorce for sale.

Attorneys or parties in California that would like to view a portion of an 11 page sample opposition to an order to show cause for contempt in a California divorce containing brief instructions, a memorandum of points and authorities with citations to case law and statutory authority, sample declaration and proof of service 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 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.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Rates of Single Motherhood Continue to Skyrocket as Social Engineers Destroy Families — The New Modern Man

“That ole no good man just left me alone and desperate. I’m a single mom.” I rolled my eyes as I heard that in passing on daytime TV recently. (I don’t watch TV but other people do, and sometimes I get subjected to the mind programming.) Of course, “I’m a single mom” is both the […]

via Rates of Single Motherhood Continue to Skyrocket as Social Engineers Destroy Families — The New Modern Man

The worst part is that this trend will only increase in the future.  I see no way of reversing this trend.

PA: Another progressive voice for change (II) — Peace Not Pas

Part II of our guest post from a professional head of social care. ——————————————————————————————————————————– Parent Alienation: Is it Me? In part one I talked about the need to make a concerted effort to combat parent alienation, positively targeting marginalised men as an antidote to the growing problem of fatherlessness. I talked about my belief in […]

via PA: Another progressive voice for change (II) — Peace Not Pas

PA: Is it me? Including not excluding fathers — Peace Not Pas

We are very pleased to provide a platform for another progressive voice for change. This time, our guest blogger is a senior social services manager who is a change catalyst within her social services department. She recognises that parent alienation is extremely concerning and a growing problem, largely because it is not properly understood, is […]

via PA: Is it me? Including not excluding fathers — Peace Not Pas

To be the Voice of Every Child who has None — Peace Not Pas

[The following is written by an anonymous contributor] Easter Sunday, April 22nd, 1973. I saw my father for the very last time, when I was aged three. He travelled down to South Jersey to see me. I heard him knock on the door. My mother shushed me to my bedroom. I peeped through my Mickey Mouse […]

via To be the Voice of Every Child who has None — Peace Not Pas

I wanted to share this very moving article