Legal Opinion
In Re Marriage of Chakko
California Court of Appeal
Decided January 22, 2004No. B166116PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
YEGAN, J.—
The first obligation of a parent is to support his or her children. {In re Marriage of Hyon & Kirschner (1991) 231 Cal.App.3d 449, 452 [282 Cal.Rptr. 408].) This rule is apparently lost on appellant, who sees the instant child support action only as a contest with his former wife. In this situation, a spouse should set aside his or her animosity for a former spouse and focus instead on the financial well-being of his or her children.
Jacob Chakko (Father) appeals from the trial court’s postjudgment child support “issue sanction” order declaring that his income is $40,000 per…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Estate of GilkisonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1998
- Vallbona v. SpringerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1996
- Kuhns v. State of CaliforniaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1992
- In Re Marriage of MartinCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1991
- Rail Services of America v. State Compensation Insurance FundCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2003
3Cited by8 opinions
- Doe v. United States Swimming, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2011
- Calcaterra v. BadakhshCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2005
- Mileikowsky v. Tenet HealthsystemCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2005
- 167 E. Williams v. Blessings CA6California Court of Appeal · 2014
- Anderson v. Los Angeles Unified School Dist. CA2/5California Court of Appeal · 2015
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.