Worrell

County of Yolo v. Worrell

Good Law
1989 Cal. App. LEXIS 174·208 Cal. App. 3d 471·256 Cal. Rptr. 259
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMarch 6, 1989C004805California3,206 words

Opinion

Opinion

Marler, J.

Defendant Richard Worrell (father) appeals from the trial court’s order that he pay $126 per month as temporary support of his minor child Jasmine Aisha Worrell. He initially challenges the county’s decision to file an independent action rather than intervene in an extant domestic relations action. He also asserts his right to an offset for money he spends on the child’s support during the two weeks each month that she spends with him. Finally, he claims the trial court erred by failing to consider the mother’s ability to work. We shall conclude that the county properly filed this action and that the record demonstrates no error in the amount of support the court ordered father to pay.

Factual and Procedural Background

The facts relevant to this appeal are not disputed. Defendant and Angelika E. Worrell (mother) are the parents of Jasmine, born April 20, 1978. The parents have apparently divorced. In the couple’s marriage dissolution action, the family law court apparently reserved the issue of child support. The parents have a de facto joint custody arrangement under which the child spends equivalent time with each parent, with periods of alternating actual physical…

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.