Norman D. Peterson - Page 10

                                       - 10 -                                         
          Income Tax Regs. (emphasis added); see sec. 1.71-1T(a), Q&A-4,              
          Temporary Income Tax Regs., 49 Fed. Reg. 34455 (Aug. 31, 1984);             
          see also Landreth v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1997-169; Ambrose             
          v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1996-128.  Thus, the proper inquiry             
          is not whether a final determination of the rights of the parties           
          had been made in the action for divorce at the time of the Minute           
          Order's issuance, but whether the Minute Order and attached                 
          Tentative Decision constitutes an enforceable order under                   
          California law requiring Norman to make support payments to                 
               Section 1003 of the California Code of Civil Procedure (West           
          1980) defines an order as follows:  "Every direction of a court             
          or judge, made or entered in writing, and not included in a                 
          judgment, is denominated an order."  A minute order is a "written           
          order of the court, and no formal writing signed by the court and           
          filed with the clerk is necessary" for it to be effective.                  
          Simmons v. Superior Court, 341 P.2d 13, 17 (Cal. 1959).                     
               In the instant case, upon examination of the language of the           
          Minute Order and attached Tentative Decision, it is evident that            
          it is a direction of the court within the meaning of section 1003           
          of the California Code of Civil Procedure (West 1980).  The                 
          Minute Order unequivocally directs Norman to pay Marta spousal              
          support in a certain amount commencing January 15, 1992, as set             
          forth in the attached Tentative Decision; the language is not, as           
          Marta would have it, merely precatory.  See Whitney v. Whitney,             

Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011