REQUEST FOR ORDER CHANGE OF CHILD SUPPORT, PERCENTAGE EXPENSE
1 SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA 2 COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 3 UNIFIED FAMILY COURT 4
5) 6 ANNE LESLEY SALCER,) Case Number: FDV-10-807626) 7 Petitioner) Hearing Date: July 30, 2026) 8 VS.) Hearing Time: 9:00 AM) 9 FRANCOIS LUONG,) Department: 403) 10 Respondent) Presiding: JPT JUDITH E. HARDING) 11) 12 REQUEST FOR ORDER CHANGE OF CHILD SUPPORT, PERCENTAGE EXPENSE 13 TENTATIVE RULING 14 Having read and considered the pleadings, declarations, and other evidence submitted in this matter, the 15 Court makes the following findings and orders: 16 A. Procedural History 17 1) The parties are Petitioner Anne Lesley Selcer (Mother) and Respondent Francois Luong (Father). 18 They share one minor child: Sitka, age 17 (DOB: 7/2/09). 19 2) On 6/15/26, Mother filed a Request for Order seeking modification of the child support order 20 filed 11/13/20 ($1,052 monthly child support with a two-way bonus table retroactive to 8/1/20), 21 reallocation of child support add-on expenses, and Father ordered to maintain the minor child’s 22 current health insurance. 23 3) On 6/15/26, Mother filed an Income and Expense Declaration. 24 4) On 7/14/26, Father filed a Responsive Declaration in opposition to Mother’s Request for Order. 25 Father asserts that an increase in child support “would have catastrophic consequences on [his] 26 ability to provide care for Sitka.”
Father states that he was laid off in 2022 and didn’t secure new 27 employment until February 2024 and incurred a significant amount of debt. 28 5) On 7/14/26, Father filed an Income and Expense Declaration. 29 6) On 7/23/26, Mother filed a Reply Declaration reiterating her position.
1 B. Findings and Order 2 1) Per Family Code section 3653, orders granting modification of child support may be made 3 retroactive to the date of the filing of the notice of motion or to any subsequent date. 4 2) As such, the Court finds good cause to GRANT Mother’s request for modification of child 5 support retroactive to 6/15/26 as the parties’ employment statuses and the parenting time changed 6 since the 11/13/20 child support order was issued, both of which qualify as a change in 7 circumstances warranting modification of support.
See Marriage of Bardzik (2008) 165 CA4th 8 1291, 1303-1304. 9 3) Effective 6/15/26, Father shall pay Mother $1,061 in guideline monthly child support by the 1st of 10 every month. Monthly payments shall commence on 8/1/26. 11 4) This means that Father owes Mother $18 in guideline child support arrears. Father shall pay this 12 balance in full by 8/15/26. 13 5) Moving forward, the parties shall share the following add-on expenses with Father responsible for 14 81% and Mother 19% of costs: childcare costs related to employment or to reasonably necessary 15 education or training for employment skills, reasonable uninsured healthcare costs for the child, 16 and the reasonable costs associated with mutually agreed upon extracurricular activities (neither 17 party shall unreasonably withhold consent for a child to participate in an activity).
Looking for case law or statutes not cited here? Search published authorities
Examples: “Why did the court rule this way?” · “What were the procedural grounds?” · “Is appearance required?”
The procedure 18 to make or pay a reimbursement claim for these child support add-ons shall be as set forth in 19 Judicial Council Form FL-192. 20 6) By law, health insurance coverage for a supported child shall be maintained by either or both 21 parents if that insurance is available at no cost or at a reasonable cost to the parent. See Family 22 Code section 3751. 23 7) As such, Mother’s request that Father maintain the minor child on the health insurance plan under 24 which the minor child was previously covered is GRANTED. 25 8) The Court will prepare the Findings and Order After Hearing. 26
26-07-30 XSpouse selcer v. luong 807626.xsp
2026 Xspouse 2026-1-CA Monthly Figures Fixed Shares Father Mother Monthly Figures Cash Flow Number of children 0 1 2026 Guideline Proposed Percent time with NCP 49.00% 0.00% Combined net spendable 5586 5810 Filing status SINGLE HH/MLA Percent change 0% 4% GUIDELINE Number of exemptions 1 2 Nets (adjusted) Father Wages and salary 7704 0 Self employed income 0 0 Father 5586 Payment cost/benefit -1061 -880 Other taxable income 0 0 Mother 0 Net spendable income 4525 4706 TANF CS received 0 0 Total 5586 Change from guideline 0 182 Other nontaxable income 0 0 Support % of combined spendable 81% 81% New spouse income 0 0 % of saving over guideline 0% 81% Addons 0 Employee 401-k contribution 0 0 Total taxes 1863 1639 Guideln CS 1061 Adjustments to income 384 0 Dep. exemption value 0 0 S.Clara SS 0 SS paid prev marriage 0 0 # withholding allowances 0 0 Total 1061 CS paid prev marriage 0 0 Net wage paycheck 5485 5485 - Health insurance 255 0 Settings changed Mother Other medical expenses 0 0 Payment cost/benefit 1061 1104 Proposed Property tax expenses 0 0 Net spendable income 1061 1104 Tactic 9 Ded interest expense 0 0 Change from guideline 0 43 Contribution deduction 0 0 CS 1104 % of combined spendable 19% 19% Misc tax deductions 0 0 SS 0 % of saving over guideline 0% 19% Qualified business income Total 1104 0 0 Total taxes 0 0 deduction Saving 224 Dep. exemption value 0 0 Required union dues 0 0 Releases 1 # withholding allowances 0 0 Mandatory retirement 0 0 Net wage paycheck 0 0 Hardship deduction 0 0 Other GDL deductions 0 0 Child care expenses 0 0
Father pays Guideline CS, Proposed CS
FC 4055 checking: ON Per Child Information DOB Timeshare cce(F) cce(M) Addons Payor Basic CS Payor Pres CS Payor All children 49 - 51 0 0 0 Father 1,061 Father 1,061 Father 0000-00-00 49 - 51 0 0 0 Father 1,061 Father 1,061 Father
Superior Court of California County of San Francisco