Schwartz v. Medina
Filed 6/14/06 Schwartz v. Medina CA2/7
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.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
SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION SEVEN
| CHRISTOPHER SCHWARTZ, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. TERESA MEDINA, Defendant and Respondent. | B183117 (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. BF018049) |
APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of the County of Los Angeles, Nicholas D. Taubert, Commissioner. Dismissed.
The Law Office of Anthony Roach and Anthony A. Roach for Plaintiff and Appellant.
County of Los Angeles Child Support Services Department and L. Cruz, Chief Attorney, and Fesia A. Davenport for Defendant and Respondent.
_______________________
Christopher Schwartz purports to appeal from an order of child support that was set aside on April 18, 2005, nine days before he filed his notice of appeal on April 27, 2005. Because there is no operative order from which we can grant relief, we dismiss the appeal.
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
Although this matter has a complicated history in both the dependency and family law courts, only a limited portion of that history is relevant to the resolution of the matter before us.
1. Los Angeles County Child Support Enforcement Action Against Schwartz
Teresa Medina and Schwartz are the parents of William (born in April 1987) and Arnold (born in May 1997).[1] In May 1999 Medina began receiving federal public assistance benefits (Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (42 U.S.C § 601 et. seq.)) for William and Arnold. In 2000 the County of Los Angeles (County) filed two actions against Schwartz on Medina's behalf to declare Schwartz the father of William (L.A.S.C. No. BY0413727) and Arnold (L.A.S.C. No. BY0535338) and to obtain child support. On April 1, 2000 the court found Schwartz to be the father of Arnold and ordered Schwartz to pay $539 per month in child support. In 2001 the court found Schwartz to be the father of William and ordered him to pay child support arrears for the period during which William had lived with his mother. Apparently, at the time of the order Schwartz had assumed full and uncontested custody of William; and for that reason, no new child support for Medina's care of William was ordered.
2. Schwartz's Action for Custody and the July 2001 Judgment
In April 2001 Schwartz filed an action in the superior court (L.A.S.C. No. BF018049 in Department 9) requesting joint legal and physical custody of Arnold, sole legal and physical custody of William and a determination of child support. Before the November 5, 2001 trial on that action, Schwartz and Medina entered into a settlement agreement that became the judgment of the court on July 24, 2001. Schwartz was awarded primary physical custody of William, and Medina was awarded primary physical custody of Arnold. The July 2001 judgment further provided that â€
