Reason Was Lower Judge Previously Had Denied Needs Based Fees For Other Post-Appeal Work Such That No Different Analysis Would Apply To Appellate Fees Issue.
Marriage of Elizabeth and Gregory G., Case No. B259276 (2d Dist., Div. 7 Sept. 12, 2016) (unpublished) was a situation where a lower court erroneously determined that a wife’s request for appellate fees was untimely. The Court of Appeal did confirm, for the edification of all family law practitioners or appellate attorneys, that the California Rules of Court govern motions for attorney’s fees on appeal in family law matters—meaning parties to a family law action have 40 days following the date the appellate court issues the remittitur to request attorney’s fees on appeal. (In re Marriage of Freeman, 132 Cal.App.4th 1, 9 (2005).) Even though wife did file her request within the 40-day period, the denial was not prejudicial because the lower court previously had denied a needs-based fee request for different post-appeal fees incurred in the family court and nothing else demonstrated this would not have been the same result on the appellate fees issue.