Woodlief v. Woodlief CA1/5

Filed 8/29/23 Woodlief v. Woodlief CA1/5 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION FIVE

MILES ARCHER WOODLIEF, Plaintiff and Appellant, A166235

v. (Marin County Super. Ct. No. JENNIFER LYNN WOODLIEF, FL095748) Defendant and Respondent.

Plaintiff and appellant Miles Archer Woodlief (Father) appeals from the trial court’s order fixing and liquidating child support arrears. Following an evidentiary hearing, the trial court fixed the amount of child support arrears owed by Father to defendant and respondent Jennifer Lynn Woodlief (Mother) at $213,455. Father contends the trial court erroneously included $205,000 of debt in this amount that was unrelated to Father’s child support obligations to Mother. We find no abuse of discretion and affirm. I. BACKGROUND Father and Mother finalized their divorce in December 2009. As part of their marital settlement agreement, Father was ordered to pay Mother $10,000 per month in child support for their then three minor children.1

1 The trial court later found that Father and Mother had modified child

support by agreement to $9,000 per month as of December 2009.

1

Throughout the years, the parties maintained a joint bank account (Account) that Father deposited and withdrew funds from, with Mother’s permission.2 Father deposited child support payments into the Account and also deposited and withdrew other funds that were unrelated to child support. Mother kept a running tally of the debt owed to her by Father based on his withdrawals and deposits as well as amounts he purportedly owed in back child support. For example, in September 2017, Mother emailed Father, “you have $205,000 of my $ representing years of back [child support] and other funds that you were ‘holding for me in [one of our children’s] account.’ ” In September 2019, Mother emailed Father that his debt to her, including $9,000 in child support for July, August, and September, totaled $344,864. In March 2020, Mother filed an “OSC [Order to Show Cause] re Contempt” against Father, alleging that Father owed her child support. After finding that “Mother had failed to demonstrate the precise amount of Father’s alleged arrearages and had failed to show that any failure to pay child support was willful,” the trial court dismissed Mother’s OSC with prejudice. Mother subsequently opened a case with the Marin County Department of Child Support Services (DCSS), and DCSS filed a motion to determine support arrearage and set liquidation (Motion). The Motion asked the court to decide (1) “whether Father’s repayment to the [Account] comingled support payments with repayment of loans,” and (2) “whether Father has a support arrearage and how much that arrearage actually may be.” Father filed an opposition to Mother’s request for child support. He argued that he “was more than current with child support” but that he was