Cases: Family Law

Family Law:  Lower Court’s Failure To Make Explicit Findings On Family Code Section 2030 Factors, Plus Reliance On Irrelevant Ones, Resulted In A Reversal/Remand

Cases: Family Law

General Ability To Pay Findings Were Not Sufficient.               In Manning v. Manning, Case No. D084718 (4th Dist., Div. 1 Nov. 12, 2025) (unpublished), a contentious divorce case with lots of activity, a lower court—mainly out of frustration—denied ex-wife’s request for a Family Code section 2030 fee award of $200,000 for fees and $50,000 in expert

Discovery, Family Law: $165,188.75 Needs-Based Award To Ex-Wife Reversed Because Lower Court Failed To Consider Whether Her Discovery Efforts Were Unreasonable Or Over Litigated

Cases: Discovery, Cases: Family Law

Record Below Showed The Lower Court Pulled The Trigger Too Fast.                Tragni v. Tragni, Case No. A169130 (1st Dist., Div. 5 Aug. 12, 2025) (unpublished) is one of those rare cases where a needs-based family law award to an ex-wife was reversed for an abuse of discretion.  We now explore why.                Ex-wife received

Appealability, Family Law: Denial Of 2030 Request For Fees, Pendency On Appeal, Could Not Result In A Subsequent Request Involving The Same Facts

Cases: Appealability, Cases: Family Law

The First Fee Award Appeal Divested Appellate Court Of Jurisdiction On Second Award.                Weaklend v. Weaklend, Case Nos. D086167 et al. (4th Dist., Div. 1 July 30, 2025) (unpublished) confirms that an appellate court is divested of jurisdiction from considering an appeal of a subsequent Family Code section 2030 fee award where the same

Family Law: Denial Of Needs-Based Family Code Section 2030 Fees Reversed Because Lower Court Made No Findings Of Ability To Pay

Cases: Family Law

Consideration Of Equitable Factors Other Than Disparity and Ability To Pay Are Not Allowable Under Section 2030.                In Marriage of Saedi v. Kadivar, Case No. B340089 (2d Dist., Div. 2 June 23, 2025) (unpublished), the lower court denied a Family Code section 2030 needs-based fee request by ex-wife in connection with child support modification

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

Scroll to Top