FAMILY LAW CASES

• Christensen v. Comm'r of Internal Revenue
• State of California Dep't of Soc. Servs. v. Leavitt
• Edwards v. Edwards
• State Dep't of Soc. Serv. v. Superior Court (D.P.)

U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, April 21, 2008
Christensen v. Comm'r of Internal Revenue, No. 06-71881
In a suit for relief from tax liability as an "innocent spouse," summary judgment for the Commissioner of Internal Revenue is affirmed where relief under 26 U.S.C. section 6015(f) is available only to taxpayers who file joint federal income tax returns. Read more...

U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, April 25, 2008
State of California Dep't of Soc. Servs. v. Leavitt, No. 06-56136
In a case involving whether the California Department of Social Services (CDSS) complied with an order requiring it to provide for the review of all foster care cases open on or after March 3, 2003, for benefits eligibility under a prior case's construction of a statute determining eligibility for the Aid to Families with Dependent Children-Foster Care program, denial of motions to enforce the judgment is reversed in part insofar as the court failed to address a request to authorize discovery regarding the agencies' compliance. Grant of agencies' motion for relief from judgment as of the date of the implementation of the Deficit Reduction Act (DRA) is affirmed where the district court did not abuse its discretion by allowing the agencies to implement the DRA as Congress intended. Read more...

California Appellate Districts, April 22, 2008
Edwards v. Edwards, No. B191035
In a child support case considering the applicability of the statutory support guideline to a competent adult child who has moved away to college, the court of appeals concludes that where neither parent retains "primary physical responsibility" under Family Code section 4055 subdivision (b)(1)(D) of an adult child for any percentage of time, the guideline formula, by its terms, is inapplicable. Read more...

California Appellate Districts, April 23, 2008
State Dep't of Soc. Serv. v. Superior Court (D.P.) , No. C057419
The juvenile court has the authority to order a dependent child returned to the home of designated prospective adoptive parents when, after a hearing held to determine whether the removal of a child from the home of prospective adoptive parents is in the minors' best interest, the court is of the opinion that an emergency removal occurring some three months earlier was in the minors' best interests but events which occurred since the removal justify returning the minors to the designated prospective adoptive parents' home. Furthermore, section 361.4 of Welf. & Inst. Code does not limit the juvenile court's discretion to order a minor returned to prospective adoptive parents after a hearing held pursuant to section 366.26(n). Read more...