Carlson

Carlson v. Eassa

Bad Law
1997 Cal. App. LEXIS 321·54 Cal. App. 4th 684·62 Cal. Rptr. 2d 884·97 Daily Journal DAR 5275·97 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 2999
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaApril 24, 1997H015399California4,809 words

Opinion

Opinion

Elia, J.

In this appeal, plaintiff Margaret C. Carlson seeks review of an order denying her motion to vacate a stipulated judgment in a “URESA” action for child support arrearages. (Fam. Code, § 4800 et seq.) Appellant contends the judgment was void because the district attorney settled her claim without her consent, contrary to Welfare and Institutions Code section 11478.2, subdivision (j). We agree that the settlement was unauthorized and reverse the postjudgment order.

Background

This action began in September 1991, when appellant filed an action for paternity and child support against respondent Mike Eassa. Paternity was established in March 1995, when the court determined that respondent was the father of Brett Steven Tracy, bom July 13, 1977. Because appellant resided in Delaware, child support issues were governed by the Uniform Reciprocal Enforcement of Support Act (URESA), Family Code section 4800 et seq.

After protracted litigation, respondent was found to be the minor’s father and ordered to pay temporary support. The issue of permanent child support was not heard until August 25, 1995. At that hearing, Stephen Hooper, the deputy district attorney representing…

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.