Trial court judgment ordering defendant’s monthly spousal support obligation be reduced is reversed where the court erred in ordering the reduction as plaintiff’s rights to access the retirement accounts on a penalty-free basis and to any increase in their values are insufficient to constitute a material change of circumstances permitting a reduction in her spousal support under Family Code sec. 4320.
Read In re Marriage of Dietz, No. G040640 in PDF
Read In re Marriage of Dietz, No. G040640 in HTML
Appellate InformationAppeal from a postjudgment order of the Superior Court of Orange County, Clay M. Smith, Judge. Reversed and remanded with directions.FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION THREEFiled: August 4, 2009
JudgesOpinion by FYBEL, J., O’LEARY, ACTING P.J., ARONSON, J.Opinion by FYBEL, J.
CounselFor Appellant: Law Offices of Marjorie G. Fuller and Marjorie G. Fuller.
For Respondent: Martin & McCormick, John D. Martin and Kathy J. McCormick.
You Don’t Have To Solve This on Your Own – Get a Lawyer’s Help
Civil Rights
Block on Trump’s Asylum Ban Upheld by Supreme Court
Criminal
Judges Can Release Secret Grand Jury Records
Politicians Can’t Block Voters on Facebook, Court Rules
