Case Update (15 Feb 2023): Shapira v. Lackenbacher; failure to object to foreign order registration in 20 days

In an unpublished opinion, the California Court of Appeals affirmed a trial judge's registration of a Colombian child support order. On March 16, 2021, the Mother filed a request to register the Colombian order. Notice was sent to the Father, who then had 20 days to contest the registration under the Uniform Interstate Family Support Act (UIFSA). On April 13, 2021, more than 20 days later, the Father requested the case file. His request was rejected by the Clerk's office. The order was registered by default. On September 20, 2021, the father filed a motion for relief from the default, which was denied on December 13, 2021 after a hearing.

In the motion, the Father argued that he "impliedly" objected to the registration notice by requesting the file, and that even though he did not meet the 20 day deadline, he was in "substantial compliance" and therefore "should be relieved of his 'failure to submit' the proper written objection in a timely fashion."

On appeal, the court opined that (1) the Father would need to have demonstrated diligence in making the motion after discovery of the default, and (2) the father would need to meet his burden of having made a mistake, inadvertent delay, surprise, or excusable neglect in acting. Yet, the Father failed, in his pleading to attach his April 2021 letter to the court, the court's rejection of that letter, or provide a reason for his delay in filing that letter, why it substantially complied with UIFSA, or his delay in filing a motion for relief in default.