In Re Marriage of Golden

California Court of Appeal Aug 17, 1981 No. Civ. 61771Published

Before: Roth

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. Interlocutory judgments of dissolution are final adjudications as to matters decided therein; therefore, a child support order entered before the March 4, 1972, effective date of Civil Code section 25.1 remains governed by the 21-year age of majority.

Issues

Whether the age of majority for child support is determined by the law in effect at the time of the interlocutory judgment or the final judgment.
Whether the trial court erred in failing to specify the total amount of child support arrearages in its order.

Disposition. Affirmed in part and reversed and remanded in part.

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“interlocutory judgments of the kind here involved, which, in spite of being thus denominated, are in fact appealable orders and final adjudications as to all matters therein decided”

“the interlocutory order as originally made was controlling.”

Opinion

ROTH, P. J.

On November 26, 1971, an interlocutory judgment of dissolution of marriage respecting the parties to this appeal was entered, which provided, inter alia, for support of the couple’s three children

“until .. . majority . ...”

[570]

As of March 4, 1972 (for purposes of application), Civil Code section 25.1 became effective (see fn. 2). That statute provides: “The Legislature intends that any use of or reference to the words ‘age of majority,’ ‘age of minority,’ ‘adult’ ‘minor,’ or words of similar intent in any instrument, order, transfer, or governmental communication whatsoever made in this state:

“(a) Before March 4, 1972, shall make reference to persons 21 years of age and older, or younger than 21 years of age, and

“(b) On or after March 4, 1972, shall make reference to persons 18 years of age and older, or younger than 18 years of age.

“Nothing contained herein or in Chapter 1748 of the Statutes of 1971 shall prevent the amendment of any court order, will, trust, contract, transfer, or instrument to refer to the new 18-year-old age of majority where such court order, will, trust, contract, transfer, or instrument is:

“(1) In existence on March 4, 1972; and

“(2) Subject to amendment by law and where amendment is allowable or not prohibitied by the terms thereof; and

“(3) Otherwise subject to the laws of this state.”

A final judgment of dissolution of marriage was entered July 19, 1972.

In 1979, respondent, through order to show cause, sought modification of appellant’s child support obligation so as to increase the amounts payable. The petition was resisted by appellant, who urged that since the final judgment of dissolution occurred after March 4, 1972, such obligation, in terms of time, could not extend beyond the respective attainment by the minors of the age of 18 years, the theory being that the interlocutory judgment merged into the final, such that the specification “until .. . majority ...” was properly to be understood as referring to the 18-year rather than the 21-year limit.

In Re Marriage of Golden

AI Brief

ROTH, P. J.

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

AI Brief