Reimbursement for expenses

[Zigner]

Lets start with California Civil Code section 1714.1

Have you actually READ that code section?

(a) Any act of willful misconduct of a minor that results in injury or death to another person or in any injury to the property of another shall be imputed to the parent or guardian having custody and control of the minor for all purposes of civil damages, and the parent or guardian having custody and control shall be jointly and severally liable with the minor for any damages resulting from the willful misconduct.
Subject to the provisions of subdivision (c), the joint and several liability of the parent or guardian having custody and control of a minor under this subdivision shall not exceed twenty-five thousand dollars ($25,000) for each tort of the minor, and in the case of injury to a person, imputed liability shall be further limited to medical, dental and hospital expenses incurred by the injured person, not to exceed twenty-five thousand dollars ($25,000). The liability imposed by this section is in addition to any liability now imposed by law.

So, what we have here is that the child and the parent are both 100% liable for civil damages, but on insofar as they are related to medical, dental, or hospital expenses incurred by the victim.

In other words, what you posted means exactly the OPPOSITE of what you are arguing for, namely that the other parent be responsible for paying you for transportation costs.

 

[ducky8888]

Wait, are you REALLY suggesting that your sex offender child should suffer no consequences for his actions?

No, that is not what I am suggesting at all. Believe me, my son has had consequences. Not only brought down by the courts, including community service and time spend in a juvenile detention facility, but also in my home as well. Also consider the natural consequences involved in not being able to be around his sister. She is at every family event, from birthdays, to thanksgiving, to xmas, etc. etc. and because she is there, he is not. He misses out on field trips, staying over night at friend's houses, he has an early curfew. He has consequences which the courts have deemed equal to the offense.

My comment was more directed towards the legal and financial implications that come from the child's actions. A parent is held responsible for what their child does. This is why the courts say that BOTH parents are liable for the court fees and fines. the parents are responsible for the counseling. That's the way it works with minors. Once again, this is ONLY looking at it from the standpoint of the courts, NOT the standpoint of parenting opinion.

 

[ducky8888]

Your "black or white ONLY" viewpoint doesn't serve you well. Grow up and move on.

You've wasted $60 of MY time complaining about losing a small amount of money in court. The matter is closed. You lost.

You've chosen to come here and respond. you wasted your time and mine if you have nothing helpful to provide. What I am here for is advice on how to legally get my ex to live up to her responsibility as a mother. This is more than just a small amount of money. It is a precedence. It is a pattern. i want to find a way to end the pattern.

 

[CTU]

You've chosen to come here and respond. you wasted your time and mine if you have nothing helpful to provide. What I am here for is advice on how to legally get my ex to live up to her responsibility as a mother. This is more than just a small amount of money. It is a precedence. It is a pattern. i want to find a way to end the pattern.

You don't get to control whether or not Mom has to do A, B or C.


That's the part you don't seem to understand (at least that's one part you don't understand ... there are more)

There's your black-and-white answer.

 

[Zigner]

What I am here for is advice on how to legally get my ex to live up to her responsibility as a mother.

The judge has already decided the matter. What you came here to do is shout "no fair!"

 

[Zigner]

I'm sorry that you're not hearing what you want to hear. Perhaps you should type out, word for word, what you want to hear so that we can parrot it back to you and you can be on your merry way.

 

[LdiJ]

You've chosen to come here and respond. you wasted your time and mine if you have nothing helpful to provide. What I am here for is advice on how to legally get my ex to live up to her responsibility as a mother. This is more than just a small amount of money. It is a precedence. It is a pattern. i want to find a way to end the pattern.

The judge has already ruled against you. Unless you want to spend an absurd amount of money to appeal something this trivial, with the likelihood that you will still not prevail, then its time to accept reality.

Also, your son is 16...and therefore will be a legal adult in less than 2 years. Precedence is really a moot point by now.

 

[Ohiogal]

This isnt about what my son did, this is about his mother's actions. She is 50% liable for his actions, just as I am. But, I have been the one who has been burdened with his behavior, she has done NOTHING. I am not looking for sympathy for my son. You are assuming an awful lot. My son was 13 when he acted inappropriately with his sister. my ex and I have 2 children, and those are the only children for us both. Our daughter was already under an order of protection against him when my ex decided to to get a DVRO for HERSELF, not our daughter, and sat in court and sobbed in front of our son when her application was not granted. This is not the only action she has taken against him, just the only one I have mentioned.

And, for the record, the counselor believes that one cause of his acting out in a sexual manner was caused by his relationship with his mother.

No. This is ALL ABOUT what your son did. He needs to be responsible for HIS OWN ACTIONS. The fact that you excuse them is pathetic.

 

[ducky8888]

Have you actually READ that code section?

(a) Any act of willful misconduct of a minor that results in injury or death to another person or in any injury to the property of another shall be imputed to the parent or guardian having custody and control of the minor for all purposes of civil damages, and the parent or guardian having custody and control shall be jointly and severally liable with the minor for any damages resulting from the willful misconduct.
Subject to the provisions of subdivision (c), the joint and several liability of the parent or guardian having custody and control of a minor under this subdivision shall not exceed twenty-five thousand dollars ($25,000) for each tort of the minor, and in the case of injury to a person, imputed liability shall be further limited to medical, dental and hospital expenses incurred by the injured person, not to exceed twenty-five thousand dollars ($25,000). The liability imposed by this section is in addition to any liability now imposed by law.

So, what we have here is that the child and the parent are both 100% liable for civil damages, but on insofar as they are related to medical, dental, or hospital expenses incurred by the victim.

In other words, what you posted means exactly the OPPOSITE of what you are arguing for, namely that the other parent be responsible for paying you for transportation costs.

Hmmm, I misread that then. I will have to keep looking for the right civil code, I found it a couple years ago when this all first started.

Back to the point. If you look at child support law, what is the intent of that code? to provide EQUAL living accommodations to the child in each home. Also in the child support code is statutes which require each parent to pay half of all insurance costs, half of all child care costs. The law states that all medical, mental health, dental, optical, and school expenses are to be shared. For visitation, both parents must meet half way. accepted practice for extra-curricular activities is for each parent to pay half. And, as I stated before, it was ordered in court that all legal fees and fines were to be paid by both parents equally.

From a legal standpoint only, do you think that if the judge says she "is responsible for providing half of transportation" to and from counseling, yet because she alienated him she shouldnt be financially responsible for it? there is no logic in that.

 

[ducky8888]

You don't get to control whether or not Mom has to do A, B or C.


That's the part you don't seem to understand (at least that's one part you don't understand ... there are more)

There's your black-and-white answer.

What does this have anything to do with the topic? I am not trying to control her. She has shirked her responsibility as a parent and I am asking the court to hold her accountable.

 

[Zigner]

What does this have anything to do with the topic? I am not trying to control her. She has shirked her responsibility as a parent and I am asking the court to hold her accountable.

The court has latitude. The court has decided.

 

[Silverplum]

What does this have anything to do with the topic? I am not trying to control her. She has shirked her responsibility as a parent and I am asking the court to hold her accountable.

I don't know why this is difficult for you, but I'll break it down:
You asked.
You lost.
The End.
(Has it occurred to you that your argument was insufficient or poorly done?)

We're not here to read your complaints. Go do something useful. Maybe go to a paint store and gaze upon all of the colors.

 

[ducky8888]

The judge has already decided the matter. What you came here to do is shout "no fair!"

No, I came here to find an appeal. The judge says "there is no statute for that" and he said 3 or 4 times that he really wishes there was something he could do, because he fully understands and agrees with my argument, but there is nothing for him to write the order under. I am here looking for a way around the lack of a statute. In many cases laws are interpreted and manipulated to make them fit. I am looking for something to take back to court and say "judge, look at the case of smith v. smith, where the father was ordered to pay for XYZ because that is what was equal".

We are on a family law forum where I am looking for legal advice. It doesnt matter if the sum in question is $1 or $100,000. it doesnt matter if the reason for my expenses are that my son went on a shooting rampage or if he stole a tootsie pop. The fact is that our son has caused expenses. His mother, if she were in his life, would be liable for providing for half of the expenses (in the form of her paying for her car, her gas, etc.).

 

[ducky8888]

The judge has already ruled against you. Unless you want to spend an absurd amount of money to appeal something this trivial, with the likelihood that you will still not prevail, then its time to accept reality.

Also, your son is 16...and therefore will be a legal adult in less than 2 years. Precedence is really a moot point by now.

We also have a 9 year old daughter.. I have another 9 years to go

 

[LdiJ]

We also have a 9 year old daughter.. I have another 9 years to go

So, your then 13 year old son sexually abused your then 6 year old daughter?...and you are more outraged at your ex's treatment of your son and lack of contribution to what you believe are expenses that she should contribute to, than you are at your son's treatment of your daughter?

Dude, your priorities appear to be just a bit skewed. Absolutely none of this would have happened had your son not done what he did.