Puig

Puig v. Ryberg

Good Law
1991 Cal. App. LEXIS 482·230 Cal. App. 3d 141·283 Cal. Rptr. 604·91 Daily Journal DAR 5744·91 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 3606
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 15, 1991D010813California1,531 words

Opinion

Opinion

Wiener, J.

Defendant Ricky Joe Ryberg appeals the judgment entered in this Revised Uniform Reciprocal Enforcement of Support Act (RURESA) proceeding ordering him to pay $8,400 to his former wife, Laurie L. Puig, and $6,100 to the State of Wisconsin for child support arrearages for his minor daughter Melody. We decide substantial evidence supports the court’s implied finding Puig did not intentionally conceal Melody and on that basis reject Ryberg’s assertion he has no liability for accrued child support. We also explain why the 10-year limitations period within which an action to enforce a judgment pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 337.5 is inapplicable in light of Civil Code sections 4708 and 4383. We therefore affirm the judgment.

I

The RURESA petition alleged Ryberg was liable to the State of Wisconsin for the financial aid it provided for Melody for the period between December 1975 and January 1982 and to Puig for the relevant period before and after such aid. At trial Ryberg defended on the theory he was not obligated to pay child support because Puig had actively concealed Melody from him during this entire period. To support his argument Ryberg cites California…

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.