Court Opinion

ID: 9719497
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 07:54:16.991371+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:24:07.756556
License: Public Domain

SONENSHINE, J.
I reluctantly concur in the result. The plaintiffs waited too long to file suit. And this is true despite the fact a 10-year statute of limitations exists for the collection of judgments and commences to run *1082with each nonpayment of child support. (Code Civ. Proc., § 685.020, subd. (b).) The suit here is not for collection, but for resulting damages and other ancillary torts.
However, the plaintiffs could have stated a cause of action. Violation of a statutory duty is generally actionable in tort regardless of whether the statute provides a specific civil remedy. (Biakanja v. Irving (1958) 49 Cal.2d 647, 651 [320 P.2d 16, 65 A.L.R.2d 1358]; In re Marriage of McNeill (1984) 160 Cal.App.3d 548, 556-558 [206 Cal.Rptr. 641]; Laczko v. Jules Meyers, Inc. (1969) 276 Cal.App.2d 293, 295 [80 Cal.Rptr. 798].)
A petition for a rehearing was denied May 23, 1988, and appellants’ petition for review by the Supreme Court was denied July 13, 1988.