14 Cal. App. 5th 939
Cal. Ct. App. 5th2017Background
- Mendoza filed a May 2014 petition for dissolution seeking spousal support.
- Parties settled most issues; permanent spousal support of $800/month was stipulated.
- Retroactivity for permanent support was left to be decided at a hearing.
- Mendoza did not request temporary spousal support.
- The trial court held retroactivity could not be granted because there was no notice of motion for permanent support.
- The court relied on Family Code §4333 limiting retroactivity to the notice of motion or order to show cause rather than the petition date.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether §4333 retroactivity applies to permanent support date | Mendoza: petition date is retroactivity date under §4333. | Cuellar: no retroactivity without a noticed motion for permanent support. | No retroactivity to petition date; only notice of motion or order to show cause qualifies. |
| Whether petition filing can serve as a notice of motion for retroactivity | Mendoza seeks to treat petition as notice of motion. | Cuellar: petition is not a notice of motion for permanent support. | Petition filing is not the notice of motion required by §4333; cannot retroactively date. |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Marriage of Dick, 15 Cal.App.4th 144 (Cal. App. 4th 1993) (temporary spousal support retroactivity to petition date ordinarily possible; different from permanent)
- In re Marriage of MacManus, 182 Cal.App.4th 330 (Cal. App. 4th 2010) (courts have broad discretion on temporary spousal support)