Santa Clara County Dept. of Child Support Services v. Constantine CA6

I. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

Constantine and Rodik are father and mother, respectively, to a minor child (child). The record on appeal is sparse. The trial court’s register of actions indicates that, on August 15, 2017, the Santa Clara County Department of Child Support Services filed a complaint against Constantine in connection with a judgment regarding “parental obligations.”1 (Italics omitted.) The register of actions also includes entries for a January 22, 2019 judgment, a February 13, 2019 notice of entry of judgment, and a February 14, 2019 amended judgment pertaining to parental relations and support. The register of actions includes a succession of entries for income and expense declarations filed by Constantine after the amended judgment and prior to the hearing that resulted in the order. These income and expense declarations include one filed by Constantine on November 13, 2024, which we presume to be the November 13 declaration he cites in his appellate briefing (discussed post). None of these documents appears in the record on appeal.

1 Under Family Code section 17406, subdivision (a), “[i]n all actions

involving paternity or support, . . . the local child…