An original order for child support may be made retroactive to the date of filing the petition, complaint, or other initial pleading. If the parent ordered to pay support was not served with the petition, complaint, or other initial pleading within 90 days after filing and the court finds that the parent was not intentionally evading service, the child support order shall be effective no earlier than the date of service.
Notes of Decisions
Cnty. of Santa Clara v. Perry, 956 P.2d 1191 (Cal. 1998).
“Discussion Family Code section 4009 (section 4009) governs the effective date for child support orders obtained in family law actions, providing: “An order for child support may be made retroactive to the date of filing the notice of motion or order to show cause, or to any…”
State of Ohio v. Barron, 52 Cal. App. 4th 62 (Cal. Ct. App. 1997).
“) Family Code section 4009 limits the retroactivity of an order for child support “to the date of filing the notice of motion or order to show cause, or to any subsequent date, except as provided by federal law ( 42 U.”
Santa Cruz Cnty. v. Cervantes (In re Cervantes), 229 B.R. 19 (B.A.P. 9th Cir. 1998).
· cites it 8× “We note that California Family Code § 4009 provides that "[a]n order for child support may be made retroactive to the date of filing the notice of motion or order to show cause, or any subsequent date, or any subsequent date, except as provided by federal law.”
Cnty. of Riverside v. Burt, 78 Cal. App. 4th 28 (Cal. Ct. App. 2000).
· cites it 2× “) According to our Supreme Court, “Family Code section 4009 . . governs the effective date for child support orders obtained in family law actions .”
Bindoy v. McCrary, No. A169165 (Cal. Ct. App. Nov. 27, 2024).
“(Fam. Code, § 4009.)1 That finding, McCrary contends, rests on hearsay documents erroneously admitted over his objection.”
Marr. of Horgan, No. F064969M (Cal. Ct. App. July 5, 2013).
“” (Fam. Code, § 4009.) The first order for support imposed the obligation beginning May 1, 2006, the date of the hearing of 3 The register of actions indicates Christopher moved to set aside the December 16, 2008, order.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.