Marriage of Meek CA4/2

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 30, 2015E060508California8,251 words

Opinion

Opinion

INTRODUCTION

Gloria Meek appeals judgment entered reducing her permanent spousal support to

1 $400 a month. Gloria contends the order reducing support was not in compliance with

California Rules of Court, rule 5.92, subdivisions (b)(2) and (a)(4), and rule 5.260(a),

because Frankie Meek did not file a request for support modification, and no current

income and expense declarations were filed. Gloria also argues Frankie did not meet his

burden of establishing a change of circumstances, and the trial court erred in retroactively

reducing her spousal support.

We conclude that the failure to file a request for modification of spousal support

and current income and expense declarations does not constitute prejudicial error,

because Frankie orally requested spousal support modification and the trial court notified

the parties it was setting a spousal support modification hearing, to be conducted

concurrently with the continued hearing on Gloria’s request for arrears. Neither party

objected to the combined hearing on arrears and modified spousal support; both parties

participated by providing evidence and testifying.

We further conclude, however, that the trial court…

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.