Second District, Division 6 Finds No Abuse of Discretion in $5,000 Fee Award. Everyone knows that times are tough. However, this does not mean that every discretionary fee award should be appealed. The next case is a good example of why this is so, especially where a deferential standard of review is in play […]
Court of Appeal Shows Sensitivity to Economy in Ruling in Husband’s Favor. Many times, in our category “Family Law Awards,” we have explored needs-based attorney’s fees awards under Family Code section 2030, designed to level the playing field so that one of the former spouses can gain representation by a counsel. Although the
Fees/Costs Were Justified Under Family Code Section 6344(a). Under Family Code section 6344(a), a trial court may award attorney’s fees and costs to a prevailing party in a proceeding concerning a domestic violence restraining order after notice and a hearing on the issue. This provision was squarely at issue in the next case we
Fourth District, Division 2 Upholds No Sanctions Award in Unpublished Opinion. In our category “Family Law Awards,” we have surveyed many past decisions awarding fees against family law litigants based on Family Code section 271, which allows an award of fees as a sanction against a litigant that frustrates settlement, increases the cost of
Fourth District, Division 3 Sustains Award In a Wild Dissolution Case. For you television fans of “The OC,” we next discuss a case that could have served as an episode on the show—only with even more startling facts than the episodes that actually aired. It also demonstrates the limits of appellate review for fee
First District, Division Four Affirms Fee Award Made Under Family Code section 3153(a). Family Code section 3153 allows a court to order parents to pay the attorney’s fees for a court-appointed attorney for a minor in a custody dispute. The family law judge must consider the parent’s ability to pay in making this determination
Fourth District, Division 2 Finds Family Law Judge Relied on Inappropriate Factors. Here is one, even in this category, that we do not see often. A family law judge is reversed for considering inappropriate factors in awarding attorney’s fees to a wife under Family Code section 2030, the “needs” oriented fee-shifting statute. The lesson
Unpublished Decision Unremarkably Affirms Section 271 Sanctions and Awards Appellate Sanctions, But Remarkably Does Approve of “Estimated” Future Fee Approach in Fee Contests. The next decision we survey is not remarkable for its results: it affirmed a Family Code section 271 sanctions award of $9,500 and then imposed appellate sanctions of $7,500 for a
Fourth District, Division 3 Reverses Denial of Wife’s Request for Family Code section 271 Sanctions. The next case showcases a 30-year divorce saga between Jose and Janna Feliciano, who co-wrote and produced many popular songs, with one of the most famous being Feliz Navidad. A family law judge determined that Janna would not share
Fourth District, Division 2 Remands For Proper Determination, Using Applicable Legal Principles. In our category “Family Law Awards,” we frequently have surveyed decisions in which attorney’s fees were awarded to one side in a family law dispute based on “need” (Family Code sections 2030 and 2032) or as a “sanctions” because of litigious conduct
