Cases: Family Law

Family Law, Sanctions: 4/2 DCA Affirms $29,993 In Family Code §§ 271 and 2030 Sanctions Issued Against Ex-Husband, Plus Another $3,892.50 In Code Civ. Proc., § 1987.2(a) Fees And Costs For Ex-Wife’s Successful Motion To Quash

Cases: Family Law, Cases: Sanctions

Self-Represented Ex-Husband Learned The Hard Way That Uncooperative Conduct, Unduly Delaying Resolution, And Refusal To Participate In RFO Hearing Can Be Incredibly Costly – And This Was On Top Of $13,200 In Sanctions Already Issued Against Him Earlier In This Case.             In Marriage of Ehirim, Case No. E072397 (4th Dist., Div. 2 September […]

Family Law: Ex-Wife Properly Denied Family Code Section 271 Sanctions Because Financial Need Is Irrelevant

Cases: Family Law

Besides, Ex-Husband’s Jackson Credit Motion Had Sound Factual/Legal Bases.             In Marriage of Siva, Case No. A157554 (1st Dist., Div. 4 Aug. 25, 2020) (published), ex-husband was granted a Jackson child support credit, even though the trial judge denied dueling Family Code section 271 sanctions requests filed by both sides.  Ex-wife appealed the merits and

Family Law: In Two Contentious DVRO Actions, Ex-Husband’s Prior Attorney’s Fees Order, Which Was Rescinded, Was Reversed, Although Ex-Wife’s Fee Award Was Affirmed

Cases: Family Law

Result Is Close To A “Wash.”             In In re Ankola, Case Nos. H045092 et al. (6th Dist. Aug. 12, 2020) (published), ex-spouses got involved in some nullity/domestic violence restraining order (DVRO) actions—actually two DVRO actions against each—with mixed success on the DVRO proceedings.  At the end of the day, ex-wife lost the first one,

Family Law: Wife’s Award Of Attorneys Fees and Costs For Bringing Post-Judgment Emergency Motion For Immediate Transfer Of Community Bitcoins Affirmed On Appeal

Cases: Family Law

Husband’s $189,391 In Bitcoin Transactions, Made After Wife Filed Petition For Dissolution, Were A Breach Of His Fiduciary Duty And In Violation Of The ATROS.             In Marriage of DeSouza, Case No. A156311 (1st Dist., Div. 3 August 10, 2020) (unpublished), wife learned for the first time, after entry of the dissolution judgment, that husband

Family Law: $5,700 Family Code Section 2030 Borson Award To Ex-Wife Was No Abuse Of Discretion

Cases: Family Law

Borson Challenge Rejected, With Record Showing Disparity In Assets Between Former Spouses.             In Marriage of Swain, Case No. G058117 (4th Dist., Div. 3 Aug. 3, 2020) (unpublished), ex-wife’s attorney was awarded $5,700 in Family Code section 2030 fees, payable by ex-husband to ex-wife, after her current attorney filed a request but was substituted out

Family Law: $100,000 In 2030/271 Needs-Based Fees And Sanctions Against Ex-Husband, Lawyer With A Profitable Law Firm And Equity In A House, Affirmed On Appeal

Cases: Family Law

If You Assert Inability To Pay, Make Sure You Have The Proper Ammunition!             We have to say, if you are going to appeal needs-based fee awards under Family Code sections 2030/2032 or sanctions under Family Code section 271 based on inability to pay, you better do the math and convincingly show the appellate court

Family Law: Husband Successfully Challenges Trial Court’s Award Of Section 1101(g) Attorney Fees To Wife And Gets A Second Chance At § 2107(c) Sanctions Against Wife

Cases: Family Law

The Trial Court Erred In Its Interpretation Of Family Code §§ 1101 And 2107.             In Marriage of Yiu and Liu, Case No. B293754 (2d Dist., Div. 3 July 17, 2020) (unpublished), husband appealed the trial court’s award of attorney fees to his wife under Family Code § 1101(g) and its denial of his

Family Law: 1/2 DCA Affirms Denial Of Needs-Based Attorney Fees Requested By Wife Under Family Code § 2030

Cases: Family Law

Based On Trial Court’s Analysis Under Family Code § 4320, Husband Lacked The Financial Ability To Afford His Own Attorney Much Less Contribute To Wife’s Attorney Fees.             Family Code § 2030 provides California family law courts authority to level the playing field in dissolution actions, where sufficient disparity exists between the parties in

Scroll to Top