Cases: Family Law

Family Law: $10,000 Needs-Based Fee Award To Wife Reversed Because Family Court Failed To Make Mandatory Findings Required Under Family Code Sections 2030/2032

Cases: Family Law

Fifth District’s Morton Decision Found Persuasive To The 4/1 DCA.             The Fourth District, Division 1 in Marriage of Bustillo, Case No. D075369 (4th Dist., Div. 1 Sept. 12, 2019) (unpublished) reversed a $10,000 “needs-based” fee award to ex-wife under Family Code section 2030 and 2032 for a multiday support hearing.  The reason was that […]

Family Law, Sanctions: Father Making Another Sanctions Motion After Trial Judge Already Ruled On Prior Request Was Properly Denied

Cases: Family Law, Cases: Sanctions

“A Party Cannot Be Sanctioned Twice For the Same Misconduct.”            Presiding Justice Gilbert, who has a unique writing style, summed up the “end result” in Marriage of Anka & Yeager, Case No. B289610 (2d Dist., Div. 6 Aug. 19, 2019) (unpublished) this way: “A party cannot be sanctioned twice for the same misconduct.”            

Family Law: Ex-Wife In Languishing Dissolution Matter Properly Denied Pendente Lite And Request For Appellate Fees To Process An Appeal

Cases: Family Law

Languishing Nature Of Case And Ex-Wife’s Debt To Ex-Husband Figured In The Result.             In Marriage of Charchian & Mahgereftech, Case No. B270201 (2d Dist., Div. 2 July 31, 2019) (unpublished), ex-wife let a dissolution case languish for five years, went through multiple attorneys, eventually had a judge conclude she was entitled to very little

Discovery, Family Law: $2,500 Discovery Sanctions Order Reversed In Favor Of Responding, Prevailing Party Because No Competent Declaration Of Incurred Expenses Was Presented

Cases: Discovery, Cases: Family Law

CCP § 2023.040 Was The Key Statutory Provision.             Just to show you that technicalities can matter in the discovery area, the First District, Division 2 reversed a $2,500 discovery sanction against ex-wife in Marriage of Stupp v. Schilders, Case No. A154396 (1st Dist., Div. 2 July 10, 2019) (unpublished).  What happened is that a

Family Law: $37,679.50 Needs-Based Award To Ex-Husband Reversed, Husband’s Sanction Request Was Not Appealed, And Denial Of Further Needs-Based Fees To Ex-Wife Reversed For Failure To Make Findings

Cases: Family Law

Evidence in Record Did Suggest Ex-Wife Had Disparity In Ability to Pay.             In Huynh v. Cao, Case No. A154556 (1st Dist., Div. 4 June 27, 2019) (unpublished), the 1/4 DCA had to review several fee/sanctions awards and rulings in a dissolution matter.  First of all, it reversed a $37,679.50 fee award to ex-husband because

Family Law: Although Matter Overlitigated and Ex-Wife Had Means To Meet Her Fees, Error To Not Grant Her Needs-Based Fees Where Ex-Husband’s Failure To Segregate Separate Property Consumed Lots Of Attorney and Expert Fees In “Tracing” Activities

Cases: Family Law

More Nuanced, Granular Analysis Required Under The Circumstances.             In re Marriage of Ciprari, 32 Cal.App.5th 83 (2d Dist., Div. 1) (2019) is an important case both for the type of expert testimony which can be allowed in “tracing” cases as well as holding that needs-based fees can be allowed to a litigant having access

Family Law: Denial Of Ex-Wife’s Request For Needs-Based Fees And 271 Sanctions Of $193,223.43 Was No Abuse Of Discretion

Cases: Family Law

Record Showed She Went Through A Lot Of Attorneys And Rejected Initial Settlement Offers Which Were Within The Realm Of The Ultimate Outcomes In The Dissolution Case.             In Marriage of Santore, Case No. G055121 (4th Dist., Div. 3 June 21, 2019) (unpublished), ex-wife was denied a request for $193,223.43 in attorney’s fees based on

Scroll to Top