M.G.

M.G. v. M.S. CA3

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaAugust 3, 2016C077241California3,716 words

Opinion

Opinion

FACTS

It is nearly impossible to construct a cohesive narrative from the skimpy appellate record before us. There is no petition. Prior orders are not included. Appellant does not include his own trial brief, if indeed he ever filed one. He improperly attempts to introduce new evidence on appeal by attaching a rental schedule as an exhibit to his opening brief. The schedule itself is not supported by many of his citations to the record. He does not cite to the reporter’s transcript. He admits to receipt of pension and disability payments for a combined $3,561 in monthly income, but he declares he derives zero income from his rental properties. The best we can do on this record is to piece together enough evidence to support the trial court’s rulings. Thus, we begin with the pertinent findings. The trial court attributed $8,361 in monthly income to appellant based on the following allocation: disability income of $2,033; pension of $1,528; fair market value of the rent from the roommate of $500; rental income from Santa Cruz properties of $2,000; and unexplained income of $2,300. Appellant contends the disability income cannot be counted as income for determining his child support…

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.