Marriage of Gorin CA2/7

California Court of Appeal Jul 22, 2014 No. B250533Unpublished

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court affirmed the trial court's order regarding child support arrears, finding that the appellant failed to establish any basis for determining that the trial court abused its discretion.

Issues

Did the trial court abuse its discretion in its order regarding child support arrears?
Did the appellant meet the burden of establishing error in the trial court's order?

Disposition. Affirmed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“Because appellant has established no basis for determining that the trial court abused its discretion, we affirm.”

“In a case, such as this one, where the standard of review is abuse of discretion, it is the burden of appellant to establish abuse in the face of a presumption that the trial court properly exercised that discretion.”

Filed 7/22/14 Marriage of Gorin CA2/7 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION SEVEN

In re Marriage of YULIYA and ALEX B250533 GORIN. (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. BD527864) YULIYA GORIN,

Respondent,

ALEX GORIN,

Appellant.

APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Marc D. Gross, Judge. Affirmed. Alex Gorin, in pro. per., for Appellant. No appearance by Respondent, Yuliya Gorin.

_________________________

Appellant Alex Gorin appeals from an order on child support arrears. Because appellant has established no basis for determining that the trial court abused its discretion, we affirm. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

This is the second appeal in this dissolution matter. As we set forth in our previous opinion1, appellant and his former wife Yuliya2 have been involved in this proceeding since July 6, 2010. Spousal support orders were entered in August, 2010, which appellant sought to modify by an Order to Show Cause filed on January 26, 2011. The hearing on the Order was held on July 6, 2011; the trial court denied the modification, and ordered the payments of arrears and attorney’s fees, secured by a lien on appellant’s property. On the appeal of that order, this court affirmed. Yuliya filed a request for order on March 28, 2013, after remand from this court, seeking to establish the current arrears, increase the lien, and set a payment date. Appellant filed no opposition. On the date set for the hearing, appellant did not appear, but a man claiming to be his uncle, but not an attorney, appeared seeking to represent appellant. The court denied the request, and granted the order.3 Appellant sought reconsideration on May 28, 2013, asserting that he was disabled and could not appear for himself, could not afford an attorney, and had been granted an accommodation in September 2011, allowing his uncle to speak for him in court.4

Marriage of Gorin CA2/7

AI Brief

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION SEVEN

ALEX GORIN,

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

ZELON, J.

PERLUSS, P. J.

AI Brief