County of Orange v. Dishman
The County of Orange (the County) appeals from the trial courts order granting, based on principles of fairness, Kip Robert Dishmans second motion to vacate a stipulation and order establishing paternity and requiring child support of Frank C. The County argues the court erroneously granted the motion because: (1) Family Code section 7645 et seq., provides the comprehensive statutory framework for vacating a paternity judgment; (2) the principle of res judicata prevents Dishman from relitigating his motion; (3) there was no evidence of extrinsic fraud; and (4) the County, despite public policy concerns to the contrary, is required to follow existing law. Dishman did not file a respondents brief.
As Court explain below, Court conclude the trial court abused its discretion in granting the motion to vacate based on principles of fairness because section 7645 et seq., provides the comprehensive statutory framework for vacating a paternity judgment, Dishman did not file his motion within the statutorily required period, and there was no evidence of extrinsic fraud. Court reverse the order.
Comments on County of Orange v. Dishman