Skip to main content
· 3/29/1979

Ruddock v. Ohls

Citations

  • 91 Cal. App. 3d 271
  • 154 Cal. Rptr. 87
  • 1979 Cal. App. LEXIS 1571

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • holding that child is not bound by paternity determination in marital dissolution action
  • holding that child is not bound by paternity determination in marital dissolution action
  • mother’s emotional and financial needs may prevent her from acting in a proper representative capacity for her child
  • a child has a constitutionally protected right in preserving parent-child relationship
  • applying California preclusion law pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1738
  • child is real party in interest in action to obtain support

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Creede, Franson, Hopper

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.