Intimate Sexual Contact Alone Does Not Constitute Minimum Contacts. A California woman conceived a child in Connecticut but filed a paternity and child support suit in California against the father living in Connecticut. The trial court denied his man moved to quash service of summons based on lack of personal jurisdiction. The Court of Appeal reversed, holding the man’s knowledge that the mother resided in California and the foreseeability that unprotected sex may lead to birth of a child were insufficient to establish the requisite minimum contacts. The appellate court explained that jurisdiction must be based upon facts showing a “substantial connection” to California following Walden v. Fiore (2014) 571 U.S. 277, 289. (David L. v. Superior Court (Cal. App. 4th Dist., Div. 1, Nov. 26, 2018) 2018 Cal. App. LEXIS 1067.) The father seems to regularly travel to California on business trips, and he and the woman had sex on those trips including a prior pregnancy. However, the Court dismissed these as insufficient contacts for the paternity issue. For more salacious details, which may have influenced the Court, look here … Continue Reading What happens in Vegas, stays in Vegas even, if it caused conception!
I guess Congress persons do not pay alimony. Part of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act is that Internal Revenue Code §71 is now eliminated so any divorce alimony agreements made after December 31, 2018 will no longer result on a tax deduction for alimony paid. The key is the divorce settlement or decree must be reduced to a judgment by December 31, 2018 to be deductible. The spousal support software programs now will be re-programmed so the Alice in Wonderland meets quantum physics etc. showing that this reference in the famous case anti alimony software case of In re Marriage of Schulze (1997) 60 Cal.App. 4th 519 is still relevant!