Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

In Re the Marriage of John William Logan Iii and Kyndra Mychelle v. Kyndra Mychelle Davis

July 19, 2011

IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF JOHN WILLIAM LOGAN III AND KYNDRA MYCHELLE DAVIS. JOHN WILLIAM LOGAN III, RESPONDENT,
v.
KYNDRA MYCHELLE DAVIS, APPELLANT; EL DORADO COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CHILD SUPPORT SERVICES, INTERVENOR AND RESPONDENT.



(Super. Ct. No. PFL20050063)

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Raye , P. J.

Marriage of Logan and Davis CA3

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED

California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

Appellant Kyndra Mychelle Davis (Davis) sought to set aside a 2006 order that she pay child support to her former husband, respondent John William Logan III (Logan) for their two young daughters, alleging the order was predicated upon an allegedly fraudulent income and expense declaration submitted by Logan. The trial court denied her motion.

Davis appeals pro se from that order, contending the trial court "demonstrated personal bias and prejudice" against her and deprived her of due process when it decided the matter "before reading [her] motion or having heard arguments on their merits." She also contends the court abused its discretion by not referring the matter for trial or evidentiary hearing, and by continuing "unrelated" matters to the same date.

We find no error and affirm the judgment.

BACKGROUND

Logan and Davis, who are now divorced, have two girls, born in 1998 and 2000.*fn1

In October 2006, while the girls were living with Logan in El Dorado County, the El Dorado Superior Court (by Commissioner Dwyer) entered an order after hearing that Davis pay $484 per month in combined child support and child care costs for the two girls, and that she continue to bear financial responsibility for transporting them to and from her home in Utah for visitation. This order was made after Davis sought to modify the parties' then existing visitation and support arrangement.

In June 2009 Davis brought the instant motion to set aside the 2006 support order. (Fam. Code, § 3691.) She filed a declaration of 43 pages, plus a five-page amendment and many exhibits, for the purpose of showing that Logan had provided her and the court with fraudulent information concerning his expenses and financial status. The gravamen of Davis's motion was that, in or about April 2009, she discovered that the income and expense declaration submitted by Logan three years earlier fraudulently inflated his claimed child care expenses from $117 to $400 per month, and manipulated them by changing the child care arrangements immediately before the hearing. She also averred that since 2006, Logan had interfered with her efforts to obtain records from child care providers, and "effectively blackmail[ed] me out of taking him back to court" by threatening to reveal to the family law court in California the fact of her 2005 Utah arrest on a prostitution charge, which was ultimately dropped and expunged.

Davis asked the court to issue a retroactive support order "using the I & Es submitted before [the 2006] hearing; setting [Logan's] child care expenses to $117, include [Davis's] visitation expenses of $450, and include the addition [of Logan's] non-taxable income of $344 [from] his [current] spouse's child support awarded to her for her child from another relationship, whom [Logan] claims as a dependant [sic]." Davis also asked the court to adjust Logan's claimed uninsured medical costs, to reduce her support arrearages by $2,500, and to award her punitive damages of $50,000.

Logan responded by asserting Davis's service of the motion was improper. He also sought to deny Davis visitation at her home in Utah, and instead to allow her only supervised visitation in California, "due [to Davis's] financial instability" and his belief she was "neglecting the basic needs of our children during her visits" because she was "unable to provide [them] with a safe stable place to stay" or "suitable and safe accommodations for [them]."

The hearing on Davis's motion was originally set for June 25, 2009 (further date references are to events that occurred in 2009). Before the hearing, Davis filed two applications for orders to show cause why Logan should not be held in contempt for ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.