Marriage of Booth and Aguirre
Filed 6/8/06 Marriage of Booth and Aguirre CA4/3
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS
California Rules of Court, rule 977(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 977(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION THREE
| In re Marriage of CANDACE BOOTH and JOSEPH CARLOS AGUIRRE. | |
| CANDACE BOOTH AGUIRRE, Respondent, v. JOSEPH CARLOS AGUIRRE, Appellant. | G035262 (Super. Ct. No. D343881) O P I N I O N |
Appeal from an order of the Superior Court of Orange County, Kim G. Dunning, Judge. Affirmed in part and reversed and remanded with directions in part.
Law Offices of Michel and Rhyne, and Karen A. Rhyne, for Plaintiff and Respondent.
Law Offices of Jeffrey W. Doeringer and Jeffrey W. Doeringer, for Defendant and Appellant.
* * *
I. INTRODUCTION
Ten years after the dissolution of a short (less than three-year) marriage, Joseph Carlos Aguirre brought an order to show cause proceeding to reduce his child support obligation. (Joseph and his ex-wife Candace Booth Aguirre had one child, Chelsea.)
The main issue is this: Did the trial court have the authority to impute income of $9,600 a month to Joseph in 2004, when he brought the OSC, based upon what he was paid as a consultant in the immediate aftermath of the sale of his company to new buyers in 1999? And particularly when, at the time of the 2004 OSC, he was working full time as the owner of a new business (an attorney courier service), doing much of the â€
