Chico Family Law Attorney C. Chan 530.497-0777... Win Your Case!

In what was claimed to be a case of a "move away" which had already taken place, and where there was no ongoing order, but only a Parentage Act temporary order of several months, and a time span of less than four years.........client offered other side at least 4 months a year visitation, which is actually fairly long, considering the parents are not in the same state.  Other side refused to take the offer. We note this opposing attorney does have great credentials insofar as academics, and even on objections.       In attempting to settle the case, before the trial even started, we proposed several variations, all of which would have given the other side straight time visitation of at least two months duration each time, plus more. We announced before trial began, that we would try for settlement at the outset. However, apparently the other side was entrenched in their belief that they would be granted custody and would be leaving with the child in tow for some rea

The doctrine of res judicata means that a judgment on the merits in a lawsuit involving the same parties will bar a later lawsuit based on the same cause of action; collateral estoppel precludes relitigation of issues already litigated and determined, regardless of whether the prior suit was based on the same cause of action as the subsequent lawsuit. As an example, an attorney (not attorney herein)  asserted res judicata in defending his client's claim that the order to take a 52 week for DV conduct had been completed, and that the Court's order indicated client had completed the class; however, Wife later discovered that spouse lied, and in fact had not completed the class at all.  The Court had not asked for proof of completion. Outside of whether or not this was a 'final' order, it is very unlikely that the "res judicata" would stand since the spouse obviously and purposely gave false testimony (since it could not have been true.) Therefore the