Fabienne White v. Maurice Marciano, 190 Cal.App.3d 1026 (1987)
CASE: Woman appeals court judgment in paternity action against Guess Jeans co-founder Maurice Marciano.
FACTS: White, a model and food stylist for television commercials, who lives in a two-bedroom $660/month apartment with her 81-year-old mother and her child by Maurice Marciano, appeals court's judgment in her paternity action against Marciano in which the court ordered him to pay $1,500 per month in child support plus medical insurance and $8,000 in attorneys' fees. She asserted that reasonable child support would be $3,500 (she makes $14,000 per year) plus medical benefits. Marciano stipulated that he was the father of the child, that he earned about $1 million per year and that he was able to provide any reasonable child support.
QUESTION: Is detailed evidence concerning a non-custodial parent's lifestyle and net worth relevant in determining what amount of child support is "reasonable" where the non-custodial parent stipulates that he has an income of $1 million per year and is able to pay any reasonable amount of child support?
WHITE ARGUES: Trial court erred by: - Granting respondent's motion for a protective order which precluded discovery of respondent's net worth and lifestyle.
- Refusing to allow presentation of evidence of respondent's net worth and lifestyle at time of trial.
- Awarding only $8,000 in attorney's fees.
- Ruling, "in effect, that illegitimate children may be treated differently from legitimate children insofar as the lifestyle of a wealthy parent was disregarded by the court."
MARCIANO ARGUES: Because of the stipulations (that he is the father, that he does make $1 million per year, that he lives a lifestyle commensurate with such an income and that he is able to pay any reasonable child support) he need not provide the other side's attorney's specific documentation of his wealth and income. He said he had the ability to pay $3,500 per month in child support, but that this amount was excessive.
COURT SAYS: Affirms trial court (finding for Marciano).
HOLDINGS: - Trial court did not err in precluding from discovery detailed evidence concerning a non-custodial parent's lifestyle and net worth in determining what amount of child support is "reasonable" where the non-custodial parent stipulates that he has an income of $1 million per year and is able to pay any reasonable amount of child support.
- The trial court did not abuse its discretion in awarding $1,500 per month in child support to White.
RATIONALE:
- A trial court is not required to consider detailed lifestyle and net worth evidence in reaching a decision as to the needs of the child or the amount of support to be awarded, even though the court is required to consider, in a general sense, the non-custodial parent's standard of living.
- Evidence of a detailed net worth is relevant only in those situations where the ability of the non-custodial parent to make adequate support payments may be affected by the unwise expenditure of income to the detriment of the supported minor. In this case, there was no question as to the non-custodial parent's ability to pay any reasonable support order.
- There was substantial evidence to support the award of $1,500, namely that it was would more than double the amount of money coming into the household (the mother earns $14,000 per year, but, under this arrangement, will receive $18,000 per year in child support from Marciano).
NOTE ON THE ATTORNEYS: Edward Horowitz (for Marciano), a former president of the California Appellate Bar Association, also represented the parents of Nichole Brown Simpson in their civil suit against O.J. Simpson, death row prisoner William
Kirkpatrick Jr. Simon Taub represented John Z. De Lorean in his divorce from his wife, Cristina Ferrare Thomopoulos.
PATERNITY ACTION AGAINST EMILIO ESTEVEZ: Estevez v. Suprerior Court, 22 Cal.App.4th 423 (1994)
T O P
|