What is the name of your state? California
The judge in our CS case made an error in child support add ons. She told the father that he only had to pay $50.00 of the $475.00 a month I pay for daycare. She said that since my husband has an income and we both work that his income will supplement what I spend on daycare so therefore the need for the father to pay for it wasn't there. Which is not consistant with the family law codes of california. So after talking to a lawyer he told me what I needed to do what file a motion for reconsideration. So what I need to know now, is that something I just type up like a petition or are there certain forms in California that I have to use. This is not a modification so its not an OSC form and I already have a court date for arears so I figure if I file a motion for something else they can hear it at the arears hearing. Anyways, here is what I have if its just something I have to type out. Please any help would be wonderful.
MY NAME
STREET ADDRESS
SACRAMENTO CA ZIP CODE
PHONE NUMBER
Petitioner In Pro Per
PETITIONER )
) NOTICE OF MOTION AND
VS. ) MOTION TO RECONSIDER
) CHILD SUPPORT ADD-ON
MY NAME ) RULING (8/17/05)
RESPONDANT )
TO ALL PARTIES AND TO THEIR ATTORNEYS FO RECORD PLEASE TAKE NOTICE THAT ON September 19, 2005 at 8:30 a.m., or as soon as the matter can be heard in Department 125 of the Superior Court for the County of Sacramento, William R. ridgeway Family Relations Courthouse, located at 3341 Power Inn Road, Sacramento, California, Respondant MY NAME will move the Court to reconsider the Court’s Child Support Add-On Ruling (8-17-05) pursuant to California Family Code 4057.5 (a), 4061 (a), 4062 (b) (c), 4062 (2).
1. Reconsideration of the ruling that was made in Department 120 on 8-17-05 for child support and add-on daycare expenses. The judge used my husband’s income in figuring how much William C. Scott should pay for daycare. The judge said my husband (HUSBANDS NAME) and MY NAME both having incomes will offset any daycare that needs to be paid. The judge stated that this does not mean that my husband is responsible for the child but he does have an income that helps offset any daycare I pay so therefore she ruled that HIS NAME only pay $50.00 of the $475.00 a month the mother pays in daycare. The mother having 3 children that she does not receive child support for and a husband that pays child support for his own two children this ruling was in error pursuant to Family Law code 4057.5(a)(1) The income of the obligor parent’s subsequent spouse or non-marital partner shall not be considered when determining or modifying child support, except in an extraordinary case where excluding that income would lead to extreme severe hardship to any child subject to the child support award, in which case the court shall also consider whether including that income would lead to extreme and severe hardship to any child supported by the obligor or by the obligor’s subsequent spouse or non-marital partner.
2. The code is clear that the day care cost to allow a parent to work or obtain work sills is a mandatory add on Family Code Section 4061(a) If there needs to ban an apportionment of expenses pursuant to Section 4062, the expenses shall be divided one-half to each parent, unless either parent requests a different apportionment pursuant to subdivision (b) and presents documentation which demonstrates that a different apportionment would be more appropriate (c) If requested by either parent, ad the court determines it is appropriate to apportion expenses under Section 4062 other than one-half to each parent, the apportionment shall be as follows: (2) Any additional child support required for expenses pursuant to Section 4062 shall thereafter be ordered to be paid by the parents in proportion to their net disposable incomes as adjusted pursuant to subdivisions (c) and (d).
3. HIS NAME lives with his mother so therefore has no expenses the court need to take into consideration. He has not proved to MY NAME or the court that he has any expenses.
4. No taxes are paid on State disability money so therefore his net disposable income is more than was on the dissomaster. HIS NAME has not produced any wage stubs for the State disability he claims he is on.
Wherefore, Petitioner prays judgment will be reversed and HIS NAME will still have to pay half of all child care according to family law.
________________________________________
Respondant
VERIFICATION
The statements in the above Petition are true of my own knowledge, except as to the matters that are therein stated on my information and belief, and as to those matters I believe them to be true.
Executed on August 19________, 2005, at _Sacramento___, California.
I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.
________________________________________
Respondant
The judge in our CS case made an error in child support add ons. She told the father that he only had to pay $50.00 of the $475.00 a month I pay for daycare. She said that since my husband has an income and we both work that his income will supplement what I spend on daycare so therefore the need for the father to pay for it wasn't there. Which is not consistant with the family law codes of california. So after talking to a lawyer he told me what I needed to do what file a motion for reconsideration. So what I need to know now, is that something I just type up like a petition or are there certain forms in California that I have to use. This is not a modification so its not an OSC form and I already have a court date for arears so I figure if I file a motion for something else they can hear it at the arears hearing. Anyways, here is what I have if its just something I have to type out. Please any help would be wonderful.
MY NAME
STREET ADDRESS
SACRAMENTO CA ZIP CODE
PHONE NUMBER
Petitioner In Pro Per
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO
HIS NAME ) No. 01FL05132COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO
PETITIONER )
) NOTICE OF MOTION AND
VS. ) MOTION TO RECONSIDER
) CHILD SUPPORT ADD-ON
MY NAME ) RULING (8/17/05)
RESPONDANT )
TO ALL PARTIES AND TO THEIR ATTORNEYS FO RECORD PLEASE TAKE NOTICE THAT ON September 19, 2005 at 8:30 a.m., or as soon as the matter can be heard in Department 125 of the Superior Court for the County of Sacramento, William R. ridgeway Family Relations Courthouse, located at 3341 Power Inn Road, Sacramento, California, Respondant MY NAME will move the Court to reconsider the Court’s Child Support Add-On Ruling (8-17-05) pursuant to California Family Code 4057.5 (a), 4061 (a), 4062 (b) (c), 4062 (2).
1. Reconsideration of the ruling that was made in Department 120 on 8-17-05 for child support and add-on daycare expenses. The judge used my husband’s income in figuring how much William C. Scott should pay for daycare. The judge said my husband (HUSBANDS NAME) and MY NAME both having incomes will offset any daycare that needs to be paid. The judge stated that this does not mean that my husband is responsible for the child but he does have an income that helps offset any daycare I pay so therefore she ruled that HIS NAME only pay $50.00 of the $475.00 a month the mother pays in daycare. The mother having 3 children that she does not receive child support for and a husband that pays child support for his own two children this ruling was in error pursuant to Family Law code 4057.5(a)(1) The income of the obligor parent’s subsequent spouse or non-marital partner shall not be considered when determining or modifying child support, except in an extraordinary case where excluding that income would lead to extreme severe hardship to any child subject to the child support award, in which case the court shall also consider whether including that income would lead to extreme and severe hardship to any child supported by the obligor or by the obligor’s subsequent spouse or non-marital partner.
2. The code is clear that the day care cost to allow a parent to work or obtain work sills is a mandatory add on Family Code Section 4061(a) If there needs to ban an apportionment of expenses pursuant to Section 4062, the expenses shall be divided one-half to each parent, unless either parent requests a different apportionment pursuant to subdivision (b) and presents documentation which demonstrates that a different apportionment would be more appropriate (c) If requested by either parent, ad the court determines it is appropriate to apportion expenses under Section 4062 other than one-half to each parent, the apportionment shall be as follows: (2) Any additional child support required for expenses pursuant to Section 4062 shall thereafter be ordered to be paid by the parents in proportion to their net disposable incomes as adjusted pursuant to subdivisions (c) and (d).
3. HIS NAME lives with his mother so therefore has no expenses the court need to take into consideration. He has not proved to MY NAME or the court that he has any expenses.
4. No taxes are paid on State disability money so therefore his net disposable income is more than was on the dissomaster. HIS NAME has not produced any wage stubs for the State disability he claims he is on.
Wherefore, Petitioner prays judgment will be reversed and HIS NAME will still have to pay half of all child care according to family law.
________________________________________
Respondant
VERIFICATION
The statements in the above Petition are true of my own knowledge, except as to the matters that are therein stated on my information and belief, and as to those matters I believe them to be true.
Executed on August 19________, 2005, at _Sacramento___, California.
I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.
________________________________________
Respondant
Last edited: