- 24 -
deductibility”).21 Accordingly, one could argue that the Family
Code should be interpreted consistently with that intent whenever
(as is the case with Family Code section 4337) such an
interpretation would not do violence to the plain language of the
statute. Cf. Cal. Fam. Code sec. 4075 (West 2004) (provisions
regarding the statewide uniform guideline for child support
“shall not be construed to affect the treatment of spousal
support and separate maintenance payments pursuant to Section 71
of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954”). Because, as discussed
infra, we conclude that petitioner’s family support payments
qualify as deductible alimony without regard to Family Code
section 4337, we need not decide whether a California court would
adopt that interpretive approach.
d. Caselaw
Neither party cites, nor are we aware of, any California
cases addressing the issue of whether, absent an agreement of the
parties or a directive in the divorce decree, an obligation to
pay family support terminates upon the death of the payee spouse.
Petitioner draws support from Danz v. Danz, 216 P.2d 162 (Cal.
Dist. Ct. App. 1950), and Hale v. Hale, 45 P.2d 246 (Cal. Dist.
Ct. App. 1935), cases in which the court limited enforcement of
an unallocated support award to amounts that had accrued prior to
the payee spouse’s remarriage. While those cases are somewhat
21 California enacted its statewide uniform guideline for
child support in 1993. See 1993 Cal. Stat. ch. 219, sec. 138.
Page: Previous 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011