241 Cal. App. 4th 934
Cal. Ct. App.2015Background
- Glenn and Terri Drake divorced; stipulated child support allocated $1,404/month for son Dallas while a minor. Dallas emancipated at 19 in Feb 2014.
- Dallas has psychiatric and learning disorders, lives in a Texas residential treatment center; CUSD pays tuition, room, board, and IEP services through age 22 or graduation.
- Dallas has uncovered expenses (medical copays, clothing, toiletries, recreation, snacks); parties presented receipts showing monthly outlays.
- DCSS moved to extend child support for Dallas as an adult (seeking $1,404/month). At hearing both parents spoke; Glenn earns ~ $189,000/year and objected to payments being made to Terri; Terri is largely unpaid and participates in Dallas’s care.
- Trial court found Dallas incapacitated and without sufficient means under Fam. Code §3910(a), ordered $1,404/month continuing adult child support, and directed payments to Terri so she could participate in care.
- Court of Appeal affirmed the award of adult child support but reversed the portion ordering payments to Terri and remanded to direct payments to Dallas or his legal representative.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether §3910(a) conditions for adult child support were met (incapacitated + without sufficient means) | DCSS/Terri: Dallas is incapacitated and lacks sufficient means because he has unreimbursed expenses despite CUSD coverage. | Glenn: CUSD pays major costs; Dallas’s needs are met and he is not without sufficient means; also opposes payments to Terri. | Court: Dallas is incapacitated and lacks sufficient means; adult child support properly ordered. |
| Whether adult child support payments may be directed to the ex-spouse (Terri) | DCSS/Terri: Payments to Terri needed so she can remain involved and cover incidentals for Dallas. | Glenn: Payments to Terri would enrich her and are improper because duty runs to the child; Dallas is emancipated and does not live with Terri. | Court: Error to order payments to Terri; obligation runs to the adult child (or his legal representative); remand to determine how payments shall be made to Dallas. |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Marriage of Drake, 53 Cal.App.4th 1139 (Cal. Ct. App.) (sets standard and guidelines for adult child support under Fam. Code §3910)
- Jones v. Jones, 179 Cal.App.3d 1011 (Cal. Ct. App.) (defines “incapacitated from earning a living” under §3910)
- In re Marriage of Serna, 85 Cal.App.4th 482 (Cal. Ct. App.) (adult support cannot be used to award spousal support indirectly)
- In re Marriage of McElwee, 197 Cal.App.3d 902 (Cal. Ct. App.) (same principle preventing disguised spousal support via child-support orders)