Mercado

Mercado v. Superior Court

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaNovember 21, 2024G063594California4,981 words

Opinion

Opinion

STATEMENT OF FACTS

I.

WOLF’S PETITION

In March 2022, Wolf filed a petition to determine him the father of Mercado’s two children and seeking, inter alia, joint legal and physical custody of the children. In response, Mercado checked a box on a Judicial Council form stating Wolf was “the parent of the children” and sought sole legal and physical custody of the children for herself with visitation for Wolf.

II.

THE DEPARTMENT OF CHILD SUPPORT SERVICES’ INVOLVEMENT

In April 2022, the Department of Child Support Services (DCSS) filed a “Notice Regarding Payment of Support,” which stated DCSS was providing child and medical support and that Wolf was the “obligor.”

1 On our own motion, we augment the record to include the

following documents filed in the underlying action: (1) “Notice Regarding Payment of Support” filed on April 7, 2022; (2) DCSS’ notice of motion filed on

2 In May 2022, DCSS filed a declaration noting Mercado had opened a case with DCSS the day after Wolf filed the instant parentage action. DCSS requested a “guideline child support,” that child support issues be transferred to a child support commissioner, and that the parties exchange financial information…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.