. . . Not Just A Clerical Change From Earlier Judgment. Clerical error? In Marriage of Goldberg, Case No. C077384 (3d Dist. Jan. 25, 2016) (unpublished), husband contended that a $45,000 fee award was an improper modification of an earlier judgment which had only awarded $15,000 in needs-based fees to wife. The Third
Husband Properly Granted Motion To Expunge FLARPL. Husband, who was granted the marital home as his sole and separate property in a dissolution case, expunged ex-wife’s attorney’s family law attorney’s real property lien (FLARPL) based on attorney’s failure to comply with statutory requirements for FLARPL. That result was sustained in In re Marriage
No Abuse of Discretion Given Family Law Judge Found Excessive Billing By Ex-Wife’s Counsel. In Marriage of Scott, Case No. B263480 (2d Dist., Div. 8 Jan. 15, 2016) (unpublished), Byron Scott’s ex-wife appealed a needs-based fee award of $75,000 rather than the $100,000 she requested. The appellate court found no abuse of discretion,
Allocation—Artefex LP v. Bushman, Case No. B260737 (2d Dist., Div. 6 Dec. 17, 2015) (Unpublished). In this one, plaintiffs won $15,000 on a contract breach claim after voluntarily dismissing tort claims, with the trial judge then awarding $191,256 in fees and $11,778.37 in costs based on a fees clause. The 2/6 DCA reversed
Fee Decision Can Be Based On Declarations Alone. In Marriage of Filadelfina, Case No. G050184 (4th Dist., Div. 3 Nov. 30, 2015) (unpublished), husband appealed a $43,000 fee award to wife under Family Code section 2030’s “needs based” rubric. On appeal, husband claimed a due process violation in that the family law judge
Case Has Nice Discussion On Nondischargeable/Dischargeable Fee Awards in Bankruptcy. We have to give credit to Judge Yegan and his colleagues on the Second District, Division 6. They helped clarify an issue we have seen before as far as what type of family attorney’s fees awards in family law proceedings are nondischargeable or
Parties’ Bargain Prevailed, With Fees Only Relating To Litigation To Two Specific Motions—Sweeping Away Prior Sanctions Awards. Family law practitioners should read In re Marriage of Reed, Case Nos. B253728/B255233 (2d Dist., Div. 7 Oct. 21, 2015) (unpublished). Briefly summarized, it held that a specific settlement agreement clause on fee recovery blunted any
Meyer v. Brown, Case No. D066226 (4th Dist., Div. 1 Oct. 14, 2015) (Unpublished)—Family Law. In this one, after an evidentiary hearing in which the court dismissed a domestic violence restraining order (DVRO), the prevailing party recovered $7,500 out of a requested $15,800 in fees. The fee-assessed, losing party appealed, but to no
Playing Racial/Religion Discrimination Card And Attacking Opposing Counsel/The Court Did Not “Play” Well For Ex-Husband In Bitter Custody Dispute. Well, this next case – Marriage of Salas and Farraj, Case No. B252053 (2d Dist., Div. 7 Sept. 1, 2015) (unpublished) – is a good lesson for family law practitioners to not play the
Limiting Expenses To Wife’s Trial Preparation Was Reasonable, Given Prior Activity In The Case. Wife, the party who controlled the finances during her marriage with ex-husband, was sorely disappointed when the family law judge only awarded attorney’s fees for her trial preparation. Her appeal of this discretionary decision was not successful in Marriage
