Legal Opinion · Dissent

Damico v. Damico

California Supreme Court

Decided May 9, 1994No. S033148Published

1DissentBaxter, J.

I respectfully dissent.

The majority sanction disobedience of court orders and ignore the limited scope of a proceeding brought under the Revised Uniform Reciprocal Enforcement of Support Act (RURESA). The holding encourages parents who are subject to child support orders to become scofflaws. It threatens disruption of existing national uniform procedures by which child support orders are enforced. Moreover, it ignores the Legislature’s express limitation on the power of a court to relieve a parent from an obligation to pay arrearages.

The result is all the more unfortunate because it is…

2Cases cited38 opinions

  1. Daly v. DalySupreme Court of New Jersey · 1956
  2. Kramer v. KellySuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1979
  3. County of Clearwater, Minn. v. PetrashSupreme Court of Colorado · 1979
  4. State Ex Rel. Arvayo v. GuerreroCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1973
  5. State Ex Rel. Southwell v. ChamberlandSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1985

33 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API