Cases: Family Law

Discovery, Family Law, Sanctions: $5,500 Discovery Sanctions Award Against Ex-Client Attorney Reversed Where Attorney Not Given Notice She Was A “Sanctions Target”

Cases: Discovery, Cases: Family Law, Cases: Sanctions

Due Process Violation Was Reason For Reversal.              In Marriage of Mehta & Grover, Case No. A146919 (1st Dist., Div. 4 June 19, 2018) (unpublished), a $5,500 discovery sanction against an ex-attorney for wife was reversed on due process grounds. What happened was that before the discovery sanctions motion was decided, attorney was relieved as […]

Appealability, Family Law: Litigant’s Failures To Specify Fee Order As Subject Of Notice Of Appeal And As Appeal Subject In Civil Information Statement Were Fatal In Nature

Cases: Appealability, Cases: Family Law

Although Notices Of Appeal Are Construed Liberally, The Order Under Appeal Still Must Be Specified With Some Precision.             Marriage of Schoenfeld, Case No. B281835 (2d Dist., Div. 7 June 18, 2018) (unpublished) is a reminder to appellants that some precision must be made in both the notice of appeal and the appellate civil information

Family Law: Section 271 Sanctions Award Against Ex-Wife And Section 2030/2032 Denial Of Needs-Based Award To Ex-Wife Both Reversed On Appeal

Cases: Family Law

Both Sides Had Paid Or Owed A Cumulative $1.841 Million In Dissolution Proceedings.             We are not sure that the appellate court was happy with any of the parties in this case that we now report on.   After all, in the dissolution saga, ex-husband had paid attorneys $900,000, still owing $70,000, while ex-wife had paid

Family Law: Ex-Husband Receives Full $138,000 Of Fee Request Against Ex-Wife For Modifying Support Order And Ex-Wife Only Received $10,627 In Fees Out Of Requested $159,783 Fee Request Against Ex-Husband Under Family Code Section 271 Sanctions Provision.

Cases: Family Law

Ex-Husband Obtained A Lopsided Win, With Both Parties Expending $1 Million In Litigation Costs Since Separation.            Attorney’s fees awards in family law setting are extremely discretionary and the end rest of litigation costs for both parties along the way, even with some reimbursement awards allowed, can certainly make destitute or bankrupt any party. This is

Family Law: $20,000 Section 271 Sanctions Award And $5,000 Breach of Fiduciary Duty Sanctions Award Affirmed By 4/3 DCA Against Ex-Wife

Cases: Family Law

But No Appellate Fees Awarded To Ex-Husband.             In Marriage of Reed, Case No. G050666 (4th Dist., Div. 3 May 15, 2018) (unpublished), ex-wife was assessed with $20,000 in sanctions under Family Code section 271 and another $5,000 in sanctions for breach of fiduciary duty for failure to disclose the existence of a community property

Family Law:  $30,000 271 Sanctions Against Ex-Husband Not Reviewable For Lack Of Adequate Record Including Family Hearings Which Led To The Sanctions Order

Cases: Family Law

Also, Disentitlement Doctrine Might Prevent Further Appeals By Ex-Husband.             Ex-husband in Marriage of Volovik & Parchin, Case No. B280980 (2d Dist., Div. 5 Apr. 18, 2018) (unpublished) was disgruntled when the lower court imposed a Family Code section 271 sanction award of $30,000 against him, although the result could have been worse given the

Appeal Sanctions/Family Law:  $25,000 Family Code Section 271 Sanction Affirmed On Appeal

Cases: Appeal Sanctions, Cases: Family Law

Appeal By Ex-Wife Found Frivolous, Which Carried $10,000 More In Sanctions.             Marriage of Wintermute and Soltan, Case No. G052397 (4th Dist., Div. 3 Apr. 9, 2018) (unpublished) was a situation where ex-wife appealed a Family Code section 271 sanction of $25,000 after an earlier appellate opinion disagreed with a critical assertion of ex-wife that

Family Law Post:  Family Code Section 271 Sanctions Can Be Deducted From The Variable Component Of A Spousal Support Order

Cases: Family Law

Spousal Support Is Income For Purposes Of Interpreting Section 271.             In Marriage of Pearson, Case No. D070360 (4th Dist., Div. 1 Mar. 12, 2018 partially published; fee discussion published; other parts of opinion modified Mar. 27, 2018), the 4/1 DCA decided that a trial judge did not err in ordering that Family Code section

Scroll to Top