Maytag

Maytag v. Maytag

Good Law
1994 Cal. App. LEXIS 765·26 Cal. App. 4th 1711·32 Cal. Rptr. 2d 334·94 Daily Journal DAR 10407·94 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 5738
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJuly 25, 1994No. B076342California1,317 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Klein, J.

— David D. Maytag (husband) appeals an order dismissing his order to show cause (OSC) for modification of spousal support for lack of jurisdiction.

The issue presented is whether the trial court had jurisdiction to modify the parties’ support agreement.

For the reasons discussed below, the trial court had jurisdiction to proceed. The order therefore is reversed and the matter is remanded for further proceedings.

*1713 Factual and Procedural Background

The parties separated in January 1970, after nearly nine years of marriage. Effective May 1, 1970, prior to entry of either an interlocutory or final judgment of dissolution, the parties entered into a marital settlement agreement (MSA), requiring husband to pay monthly spousal support. The MSA was not submitted to the trial court for approval or implementing orders. Further, the MSA was not referred to, attached as an exhibit to, merged or incorporated into the interlocutory or final judgments of dissolution. Both the interlocutory and final judgments were silent as to spousal support.

Twenty-two years later, in August 1992, husband filed an OSC seeking to modify his spousal support obligation on the ground of a change…

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.