Reason: Court Did Not Consider Each Side’s Financial Needs or Other Relevant Factors. In our category “Cases: Family Law Awards,” we have had occasion to examine cases awarding attorney’s fees to one side under Family Code sections 2030 and 2032. A family law judge must consider certain statutory factors in making fee awards under […]
Fourth District, Division One Sustains $3,000 Award Against Husband. In our category “Cases: Family Law Awards,” we have reviewed past decisions discussing Family Code section 271, which allows a family judge to award fees as a sanctions against a litigant or counsel who frustrates the policy of encouraging settlement or cooperation in family
Error In Not Requiring Updated Financial Declarations Deemed Harmless In Recent Fourth District, Division One Decision. Under our category "Cases: Family Law Awards," we have reviewed numerous attorney's fees awards under Family Code section 271 and other related provisions. Section 271 is in the nature of a sanctions in family law cases, authorizing
First District, Division One and Fourth District, Division One Decide Fee Award Challenges Under Family Code Sections 271 and 2030/2032. Here is a trilogy of unpublished decisions involving review of fee awards in family law matters. Marriage of Hagan – Family Code section 271 The First District, Division One seemed to struggle with
Second and Sixth District Cases Show That Appellate Record Can Be The Key to Success on Appeal. Needs-Based Fee Award Is Reversed and Remanded In Marriage of Rothe, Case No. B202733 (2d Dist., Div. 4 Nov. 20, 2008) (unpublished), the Court of Appeal reversed and remanded a lump sum fee award of $92,552.86 in
First District, Division Four Sustains Fee Awards Under Abuse of Discretion Standard. In Marriage of Ciunkaite & Zhou, Case No. A120463 (1st Dist., Div. 4 Oct. 27, 2008) (unpublished), a trial court awarded respondent wife $13,000 in attorney’s fees (in addition to a prior $16,000 award) based on “need.” Wife had spent almost
Even Under Abuse of Discretion Standard, Family Fee Awards Must Be Based on Consideration of Proper Set of Facts. We have frequently discussed how deferential the abuse of discretion standard is in most fee awards, which is the governing standard for awarding attorney’s fees in marital proceedings. (In re Marriage of Cheriton, 92 Cal.App.4th
Sixth District Sustains Section 2030 Need Award to Wife, While First District Affirms Section 271 Sanction Against Father. In our category "Cases: Family Law Awards," we have examined several decisions on attorney’s fees awards in dissolution/custody proceedings. Two recent unpublished opinions affirmed awards made pursuant to two different Family Code provisions.
Husband’s Acquiescence to Family Court’s Determinations During Fee Proceeding Constituted Acquiescence to the Award. If there is a cardinal rule that bears repeating, it is this: in order to preserve one’s challenges for a future appeal, make your objections on the record. If not, brace yourself for a subsequent retort by
Sixth District Does Nice Review of Factors in Unpublished Decision. In our July 13, 2008 post on In re Marriage of Kline Jr. and our August 13, 2008 post on George III, we reviewed cases discussing Family Code sections 2030 and 2032, which allow for a need-based award of attorney’s fees
