Oral Need-Based Fee Motions Preferable, and $833,025 Sanctions Fee Award, $20,000 Appellate Work Fee, and $16,284 Further 271 Sanctions Fee Order Also Sustained On Appeal.
In re Marriage of Falcone & Fyke, Case Nos. H034104 et al. (Feb. 23, 2012) (certified for publication) involved five in pro per appeals by wife challenging various family law rulings, including denial of her oral fee request, a $833,025 sanctions fee award in favor of her husband at the trial level, $20,000 for appellate work to husband’s attorney from wife’s prior unsuccessful appeal of a sanctions order, and another $16,275 sanctions fee order after remand of a prior order reversed in yet another appellate proceeding.
All of her appeals were rejected. With respect to her 11th hour oral needs-based fee request, the appellate court did indicate a preference for written motions because they truly do specify the grounds for such an award under Family Code section 2030/2032. Beyond that, family law courts are empowered to hear motions based upon declarations, and are not required to allow oral testimony in support of fee motions. No statement of decisions are required on fee motions, but wife waived any error by failing to herself provide a proposed statement for court consideration. Finally, wife was deemed a vexatious litigant for misusing the courts of California–which likely means we will not see these litigants again in this particularly prolonged family law donnybrook.
Above: Train wreck. Theodor Horydczak, photographer. Library of Congress.