Stover

Stover v. Bruntz

Good Law
12 Cal. App. 5th 19·2017 Cal. App. LEXIS 486·218 Cal. Rptr. 3d 551
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 1, 2017C077206California5,046 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Hull, J.

*22 Appellant Eileen G. Bruntz and respondent Russell E. Stover share two children and years of acrimony-fueled court contests following the demise of their romantic relationship. Bruntz challenges several *554 orders related to Stover's alleged failure over the ensuing years to fully pay $1,000 in monthly child support under an April 2007 support order, which contains a contested stipulated retroactivity provision.

She contends the court erred in (1) awarding Stover a child care credit of $441 per month from January 2007 to May 2011 because no motion to modify had been filed during that time; (2) failing to set aside her admissions that she incurred no child care costs from January 2007 to November 2013, the date on which the court deemed Stover's requests for admissions admitted after Bruntz failed to timely respond to the discovery requests; (3) imposing discovery sanctions on her for her mistaken failure to respond to the discovery; (4) setting child support, with no child care add-on component, at $490 per month for the period June 2011 to December 2012, and $699 per month for January 2013 to November 2013; and (5) failing to dismiss Stover's motion to modify 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.