We'll help you find the right solution for your needs
Does this sound like your topic?
I have a court date for aug.22 2012 and like to address this issue in court about the back overpaid monies
I would depend if you had a specific court order that the other parent was required to pay a portiong of the child care expenses. If youy had such a court order and the other parent ignore it or was a "deadbeat," the chances are very great that you could get a judgemtn in your favor. However, if you never had a specific past order on this issue, it would almost impossible to get any reimbursement.
Remember, court ordered child care is a form of child support. If you prove that you are owed back support, ordinarily you would be entitled to interest at a high rate (10%) and to have the other party contribute to your attorney and court fees.See question
I am wondering how old children have to be before they can choose which parent to live with.
This a frequently-asked question and the existence of such a "magical legal choosing age" is somewhat of a "urban legend" amoung parents in California. The truth is that, although some other states may have a specific age where the child gets to "choose" with what parent the child wishes to live, California does not such a specific age and I do not believe ever has had. What California does have is California Family Code Section 3042. That law says that, "if a child is of sufficient age and capacity to reason so as to form an intelligent preference as to custody, the court shall consider and give due weight to the wishes of the child..." Generally, children have to be at least of "double digit age" (10 or older) to begin qualifying under the law. Judges give great weight to what 16 or 17-year- olds want to do. Between 10 and 15 it depends a lot on what the child's reasons are for choosing one parent over the other. If it is a "serious reason," like "dad helps me with my homework more and I will applying to colleges in two years," the child's preference will be given great weight. If the reason is more frivilous like, "dad has the best video games and it is booring at mom's house because she doesn't even have an X Box," that would not be given much weight.See question
my wife, who works for a large company as a salary manager has accumulated some funds and i want to know which ones i am entitled to half of. vacation hours- 175 hours $5,225.00 sick hours- 48 hours $1,434.00 personal hours ...
401K--To the extent that the funds were contributed from compensation earned during the marriage in California or another community property state, the contents of the 401K are community property. In California, the law requires judges to divide community proerty equally. Therefore, the non-participating spouse ordinarily gets 1/2 of the retirement fund proceeds paid into their own retirement account--like an IRA.
"Days" Earned--Dividing the vacation, sick leave and personal hours is a more dificult issue. Technically, any labor performed during marriage is considered community property. Therefore,
if these fringe benefits were the result of labor perofrmed during marriage, they are technically community property. The problem is that the non-participant spouse cannot themselves directly receive so many sick leave or vacation days because they themselves do not work for the subject company. In my more-than-20-years of practice, I have seen an assertion that the participating spouse has to "buy" the other spouse's community share of their own sick leave, vacation etc. Some judges might be open to such a claim. The more frequent way to handle this issue is that the money equivilent of these fringe benefit days are added into the participating spouse's yearly income. Therefore, they wind up paying higher spousal or child support (or receiving less suppoert, if they are the receiving spouse).