For a non-custodial parent who seeks to prevent the custodial parent from moving the child out of state to obtain a hearing contesting the move, the non-custodial parent must show specific harm to the interests of the child, not just difficulty in visiting the child or generalized harm occurring in the state where the move will occur.
Family Law Case Updates
A Parent May Not be Forced to Relocate Based on the Relative Economic Positions of the Parties
The Court reversed an order that included cash and the value of stock that the husband received from the sale of his interest in the sale of a business, as income for child support purposes.
Stipulated Judgment providing that spousal support would terminate if Wife remarried within a certain period or if her new husband’s income exceeded $400,000 is sufficient to waive the automatic termination through Family Code Section 4337 even if it does not expressly mention it.
Courts will not consider support modifications on a “de novo” basis, even if the parties stipulate to it. The moving party always has the burden to show a change of circumstances.
Likelihood of future abuse is not required to obtain a domestic violence restraining order.
Wife failed to introduce direct evidence to support her claim. Oral testimony was insufficient.
There was no meeting of the minds of the parties relative to the terms of a post-nuptial agreement.
Interest in corporation was a right to reimbursement not an interest in the entity.
The work of Husband and Wife during the marriage created a potential interest in husband's separate property business.