In Re the Marriage of Hyon & Kirschner

Good Law
1991 Cal. App. LEXIS 690·231 Cal. App. 3d 449·282 Cal. Rptr. 408·91 Daily Journal DAR 7392·91 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 4700
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 20, 1991B051961California1,566 words

Opinion

Opinion

Yegan, J.

“A parent’s first and principal obligation is to support his or her minor children according to the parent’s circumstances and station in life.” (Civ. Code, § 4720, subd. (e); see also Civ. Code, § 196, subd. (a).) If the government supports a parent’s child, the parent has to reimburse the government subject to the three-year statute of limitations and the parent’s ability to pay.

County of San Luis Obispo (County) appeals from a judgment denying a $14,642.98 reimbursement claim for public assistance benefits, Aid to Families With Dependent Children (AFDC), furnished respondent’s children by the state of Florida. County filed the interstate child support enforcement action pursuant to Welfare and Institutions Code section 11350 and the Revised Uniform Reciprocal Enforcement of Support Act (RURESA). (Code Civ. Proc., § 1650 et seq.)

County contends the trial court erred when it found the reimbursement claim was barred by a Florida dissolution judgment which reserved jurisdiction on child support but never set a support amount. We reverse because the trial court misconstrued the Florida dissolution judgment and failed to apply California law.

On November 22, 1978,…

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.