Even if there is no back child support, as long as California retains jurisdiction, your income has to be used in performing any modifications in child support. see link below
What this means is that 20% of your income can be used in calculating a modification, thus increasing the amount paid, plus increasing the amount being paid toward the arrears. But, it is very important to get any arrears paid off as California is adding 9% annual compounded interest to the arrears. Note that the primary parents spouse or S/O income is also a factor, but that only affects the percentage being covered for extras, such as daycare.
There is a defense to any modification.
1988 Public Law Record
SEC. 103. STATE GUIDELINES FOR CHILD SUPPORT AWARD AMOUNTS.
(A)(a) GUIDELINES TO CREATE REBUTTABLE PRESUMPTION.-Section 467(b)
of the Social Security Act is amended-
(1) by inserting (1) after (b):
(2) by striking, "but need not be binding upon such judges or other officials;" and
(3) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
(4) "There shall be a REBUTTABLE presumption, in any judicial or administrative proceeding for the award of child support, that the amount of the award which would result from the application of such guidelines is the correct amount of child support to be awarded. A written finding or specific finding on the record that the application of the guidelines would be unjust or inappropriate in a particular case, as determined under criteria established the State, shall be sufficient to rebut the presumption is that case."
Check links for additional info.
Maryland does not have that specific provision, but all child support is rebuttable.
Only through a Rebuttable Presumption argument. see link
Neither state currently has that provision, as California does, this does not preclude a legislative change in the future to address the number of motions to modify support for fathers being laid off. Massachusetts addressed it by doubling their rates two years ago. An argument for this can be presented to the court under a rebuttable presumption, but that can be a two way street, resulting in a lower and not higher payment. see links
His second marriage is not valid.
No, He has a moral obligation to support his child financially and emotionally. Unless his income has decreased support should remain the same.
Typically courts will not penalize a child by reducing support payments because a parent has had another child because this is not seen as being in the best interest of the child.
The marriage is of no effect and the person may face criminal charges.
Marriage Equality California was created in 1998.
Common law marriage was abolished in California in 1895.
If you're talking about a marriage license--that is, the application to marry issued by the State of California--then no, you cannot use a California marriage license in Texas, you must be married in California. If you're talking about a California marriage certificate--the document that proves you were legally married in California--then yes, all U.S. states will recognize California marriages. Hope that helps!
If someone remarries but does not update their will, their previous will may still be considered valid, but the new marriage could have implications depending on jurisdiction. In many places, a new marriage can automatically revoke a will, meaning the individual's wishes may not be honored as intended. However, if the will was created prior to the marriage and not subsequently revoked or altered, it may still be valid, potentially leading to unintended distributions. It's advisable to review and update estate plans after significant life changes like marriage to ensure one's wishes are accurately reflected.
Yes, unless the marriage was a gay marriage.