Cases: Family Law

Deadlines, Family Law: Ex-Wife’s Challenge To $193,000 In Attorney’s Fees Under Family Code Section 271 Or Contractual Marital Stipulation Fee Clause Affirmed On Appeal

Cases: Deadlines, Cases: Family Law

Although Notice Of Motion For Appellate Fees Was Untimely, Record Showed That The Lower Court Granted An Extension Request To Ex-Husband As Moving Party.                In Marriage of Richards, Case Nos. G062449 et al. (4th Dist., Div. 3 June 13, 2025) (unpublished), ex-wife appealed a Family Code section 271 sanctions and contractual marital stipulation fee […]

Family Law: $50,000 § 271 Sanctions Order Against Wife And Denial Of Her § 271 Sanctions Request Against Husband Both Reversed On Appeal

Cases: Family Law

Section 271 Sanctions Order Against Her Not Tethered To Expenses, And Her Denied Sanctions Request Was Properly Raised Through A Responsive Declaration To A Different Motion Not Seeking Sanctions.                In Marriage of Kapila and Deshmukh, Case No. A170589 (1st Dist., Div. 5 June 3, 2025) (unpublished), wife was hit with a $50,000 sanctions award

Appeal Sanctions, Costs, Family Law: Although Prevailing Party On Appeal Entitled To Costs, There Was No Bases For Appeal Attorney’s Fees Or Appellate Sanctions

Cases: Appeal Sanctions, Cases: Costs, Cases: Family Law

Sanctions Award Under Family Code Section 271 Was Defective Because Prevailing Party Failed To Give Notice Of Seeking This Relief.                In Marriage of Terry, Case No. B334907 (2d Dist., Div. 6 Apr. 21, 2025) (unpublished), a prevailing party on appeal was awarded three components by the lower court:  (1) routine costs; (2) $23,587.20 in

Family Law: 2/6 DCA Affirms Trial Court’s Conclusion That Monthly Payments To Father From Indian Tribe’s General Welfare Program Is Income That Can Be Considered In Calculating Child Support And Needs-Based Attorney Fees Obligations

Cases: Family Law

Indian Tribe’s General Welfare Program Payments To Father, Who Has An Annual Salary Exceeding $100,000 Per Year, Were Not Need Based.             In Pateras v. Armenta, Case No. B336065 (2d Dist., Div. 6 February 27, 2025) (published), the 2/6 DCA affirmed the lower court’s conclusion that the monthly payments father receives from Indian Tribe’s general

Family Law: Section 271 Sanctions Denial Dismissed As An Interlocutory Order But Section 2030 Needs-Based Denial Reversed Because The Request Was Adequately Supported

Cases: Family Law

Unpublished Case Has A Nice Discussion On Why A Section 271 Sanctions Denial Is Not A Collateral Order.                Unpublished opinions frequently have good discussions on legal issues, which is the case on whether a denial of a Family Code sections 271 request is a collateral order which is immediately appealable.                In Marriage of

Family Law: Lower Court’s Denial Off Needs-Based Fees Based On Ruling That Wife Was Barred From Enforcing Marital Settlement Agreement By Laches Was Erroneous

Cases: Family Law

Laches Ruling Needed To Be Revisited.                In Marriage of Goldman, Case No. D082021 (4th Dist., Div. 1 Jan. 10, 2025) (partially published; fee discussion unpublished), ex-husband and ex-wife entered into a marital settlement agreement (MSA) which wife claimed was breached and then asked for needs-based fees and costs to enforce it.  The lower court

Family Law, Sanctions: $222,952 Fee Award To Ex-Husband Under Family Code Section 271 For Prevailing In A Vigorously Contested DVRO Proceeding Was Proper

Cases: Family Law, Cases: Sanctions

Lower Court Did Consider Ex-Wife’s Ability To Pay, Ordering It Be Paid $5,000/Month.                Family law litigants and practitioners should pay attention to how Family Code section 271 sanctions for failing to settle family law matters can be painful and a game changer as far as a litigant’s financial well-being.  Marriage of Detrick, Case No.

Family Law, Special Fee Shifting Statutes: $43,000 Fee Award To Prevailing Petitioner In An Extensive DVRO Proceeding Is Affirmed On Appeal

Cases: Family Law, Cases: Special Fee Shifting Statutes

Current Version Of Family Code Section 6344 Is Retroactive To Cases Pending On Its Effective Date, With Fee Award Not Being Seen As Excessive In Nature.                Prevailing petitioner (ex-wife) was awarded $43,000 in attorney’s fees imposed upon her ex-husband under Family Code section 6344 in a DVRO proceeding.  That award was affirmed on appeal

Deadlines, Family Law, Judgment Enforcement: Attorney’s Fees Judgment Under Family Code Section 2030 Not Barred By Normal 10-Year Enforcement Period

Cases: Deadlines, Cases: Family Law, Cases: Judgment Enforcement

Family Code Section 291(b) So Specifies.                   In Marriage of Shayan, Case No. B323455 (2d Dist., Div. 8 Oct. 25, 2024) (published), the appellate court affirmed a lower court’s conclusion that an attorney’s fees judgment under Family Code section 2030 was not governed by the normal 10-year enforcement period for most monetary

Scroll to Top