Reversed Order Occurred Because Litigant Could Pursue Option To Present Oral Testimony Even If That Strategy Was Unsuccessful.
In Marriage of Diaz and Zesati, Case Nos. 338823 et al. (2d Dist., Div. 7 July 21, 2026) (unpublished), ex-husband was assessed two Family Code section 271 sanctions awards, one for $27,000 and the other for $9,500 (out of a requested $20,000). The 2/7 DCA reversed the first one as a matter of law because ex-husband’s pursuit of reimbursement claims based on oral testimony rather than documentary evidence was unsuccessful, but that strategy did not show he was being uncooperative. The second one was affirmed for bringing a frivolous motion to change custody of the couple’s children, with notice of the sanctions being appropriate at a contemporaneous hearing where ex-husband knew the specific grounds and had an opportunity to respond. (Marriage of Quinlan, 209 Cal.App.3d 1417, 1422-1423 (1989).)