## Facts

- An interlocutory divorce judgment ordered the husband to pay the wife $140 per month in alimony and $60 per month in child support.
- The judgment awarded a community-property apartment building to the parties (two-fifths to the wife, three-fifths to the husband) and required trust deed installments to be paid in the same proportions.
- The parties orally agreed post-judgment that the husband would manage and control the apartment building.
- During 1966–1967, operating and maintenance expenses exceeded income, producing a net deficit of $10,848, which the husband paid in full (taxes, trust deed payments, repairs, and improvements).
- The husband made none of the ordered support payments; the admitted arrearage totaled $4,610.90.
- The wife obtained an ex parte writ of execution for the arrearage; the husband obtained a temporary stay, but after a hearing the trial court vacated the stay.
- The husband appealed the order allowing execution to proceed, arguing the wife’s share of the property deficit should be set off against the support arrears under Code of Civil Procedure § 440.

## Issues

1. Whether accrued alimony and child-support arrears are “cross-demands” subject to setoff under Code of Civil Procedure § 440 based on a claimed reimbursement for community-property operating deficits.
2. Whether a trial court abuses its discretion by refusing to stay execution on support arrears pending resolution of a property accounting dispute between former spouses.

## Decision

- The Court of Appeal affirmed the order vacating the stay of execution.
- The court rejected the husband’s attempt to offset the wife’s alleged share of the apartment-building deficit against accrued support arrears under Code of Civil Procedure § 440.
- The wife was entitled to enforce collection of the full amount of accrued support arrears by writ of execution.

## Legal Principles

- Accrued alimony and child-support obligations are not treated as ordinary civil “cross-demands” for purposes of statutory setoff under Code of Civil Procedure § 440.
- A claimed reimbursement or accounting dispute arising from post-judgment management of community property does not, by itself, reduce or satisfy court-ordered support arrears.
- Support enforcement may proceed by execution notwithstanding unresolved property contribution or reimbursement claims between the parties.

## Conclusion

The court held that a spouse owing accrued alimony and child support may not invoke statutory setoff to reduce those arrears based on alleged reimbursement rights for community-property operating deficits, and it affirmed enforcement of the arrearage by writ of execution.


Williams v. Williams, 8 Cal. App. 3d 636, 87 Cal. Rptr. 754 (Cal. Ct. App. 1970)