This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.
Subscribe to the Daily Journal for access to Daily Appellate Reports, Verdicts, Judicial Profiles and more...

Family

Nov. 23, 1999

Woman Loses Support Appeal - Since Kids Are Now Pushing 50

It was not a case of better late than never. Rather, a 5th District Court of Appeal panel appeared downright annoyed that Ruth E. Sweeney was trying to enforce a child support order from 1963 against her ex-husband, concerning children who are now ages 49, 47, and 46.

By Anna Marie Stolley
Daily Journal Staff Writer
        It was not a case of better late than never.
        Rather, a 5th District Court of Appeal panel appeared downright annoyed that Ruth E. Sweeney was trying to enforce a child support order from 1963 against her ex-husband, concerning children who are now ...

To continue reading, please subscribe.
For only $95 a month (the price of 2 article purchases)
Receive unlimited article access and full access to our archives,
Daily Appellate Report, award winning columns, and our
Verdicts and Settlements.
Or
$795 for an entire year!

Or access this article for $45
(Purchase provides 7-day access to this article. Printing, posting or downloading is not allowed.)

Already a subscriber?

Sign up for Daily Journal emails