Dabbs

County of Orange v. Dabbs

Good Law
1994 Cal. App. LEXIS 1095·29 Cal. App. 2d 999·29 Cal. App. 4th 999·35 Cal. Rptr. 2d 79·94 Daily Journal DAR 15192
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaOctober 26, 1994G013830California2,213 words

Opinion

Opinion

Crosby, J.

This appeal presents two issues. Is a 1991 amendment to Welfare and Institutions Code section 11350, subdivision (a)(2) to be applied retroactively? It states a noncustodial parent’s reimbursement to the county for welfare benefits paid on behalf of a minor must be equivalent to “[t]he amount of support which would have been specified in an order for the support and maintenance of the family during the period of separation . . . provided that any such amount in excess of the aid paid to the family shall not be retained by the county, but disbursed to the family.” The second issue requires us to decide whether an indigent noncustodial parent is entitled to appointed counsel in responding to an appeal from the superior court’s refusal to enforce the mandate of section 11350.

I

In November 1992, the county sued Clifford Dabbs to establish his paternity of then six-year-old Zachary H., secure a child support order “from the date of filing of the [c]omplaint,” and obtain an order for “[t]he amount of support which would have been specified in an order for the support and maintenance of the family during the [almost two years that the minor’s mother received public assistance…

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.