Diashtiani

DISCUSSION

It does not appear from the appellate record that a judgment has been issued in this case. Therefore, the support order from which mother appeals is a temporary support order, which is appealable. (In re Marriage of Skelley (1976) 18 Cal.3d 365, 368; In re Marriage of Gruen (2011) 191 Cal.App.4th 627, 637.) Child support awards are reviewed for abuse of discretion. (In re Marriage of Lim & Carrasco (2013) 214 Cal.App.4th 768, 774.) Mother first challenges the trial court’s order that father pay $0 to mother in child support because father has full custody of the minor child.

1 Father’s RFO stated that he had been awarded sole legal custody of

the minor. All other documents in the appellate record state that father was awarded sole custody, without specification between legal and physical custody. Mother’s briefing on appeal does not indicate the parents currently share custody of the minor. We presume the RFO was incorrect, and that father was granted sole physical and legal custody after the DVRO was issued against mother.

3 Mother claims this order “undermines California’s policy that children share in both parents’ resources.” (Capitalization omitted.) We…