Cases: Family Law

Appealability, Family Law: Denial Of Fees To Ex-Wife Under Family Code Section 3121 Was No Abuse Of Discretion Because The Matters Before The Trial Judge Were Unrelated To Child Custody Issues

Cases: Appealability, Cases: Family Law

However, Ex-Wife’s Appeal From The Final Judgment Was Timely Because the Interim Order Denying Fees Was Not A Separately Appealable Order.             The main lesson from Marriage of Davis, Case No. D080980 (4th Dist., Div. 1 Sept. 18, 2023) (unpublished) is a simple one:  if you are seeking fees, make sure you have a fee […]

Family Law: While Ex-Wife and Ex-Husband Were Litigating The Validity Of A Marital Settlement Agreement With An “Each Side Bears Own Fees” Clause, Lower Court Still Properly Awarded Family Code Section 2030 Need-Based Fees To Ex-Wife

Cases: Family Law

MSA Was Not Preemptive In Nature.             Ex-wife and ex-husband in Mathur v. Mathur, Case No. H050018 (6th Dist. Aug. 25, 2023) (unpublished) were litigating the validity of a martial settlement agreement (MSA) with a provision stating that each side would bear her/his own attorney’s fees.  The lower court still awarded ex-wife $61,455 in need-based

Family Law: $100,000 Section 271 Sanctions Award Affirmed Where Ex-Wife Refused Three Pretrial Settlement Offers And A Post-trial Offer Which Were All Favorable To Her

Cases: Family Law

Ex-Husband Had To Spend $208,000 To Prepare For And Engage In Trial.             Marriage of Prunchunas, Case Nos. B319493 et al. (2d Dist., Div. 2 Aug. 21, 2023) (unpublished) is a situation where a lower court imposed $100,000 in Family Code section 271 sanctions against ex-wife where she rejected four favorable settlement offers by ex-husband,

Family Law: A Two-Fer—Appellate Courts Affirm Family Code §§ 2030, 271 Fee Awards In Two Different Family Law Matters—Earning Capacity And Lots Of Litigation Activity Justified The Awards

Cases: Family Law

Marriage of Hearn, Case No. A162932 (1st Dist., Div. 2 Aug. 10, 2023) (published)–$20,000 needs-based fee award to ex-wife under section 2030 was affirmed for two principal reasons:  (1) although unemployed now, ex-husband—an attorney—had superior future earning capacity than ex-wife had; and (2) ex-husband had vigorously represented himself in the dissolution case, while wife had

Family Law: Lower Court’s Ignoring All Of Ex-Husband’s Evidence, But Using Some Of It, Resulted In Reversal Of Child Modification And $10,000 Needs-Based Fee Award

Cases: Family Law

Appellate Court Was Bothered By Inconsistent Reasoning And Use Of Selective Evidence While Finding Appellant’s Proof Was Not Credible In Entirety.             In Swan v. Hatchett, Case Nos. A163825 et al. (1st Dist., Div. 4 June 29, 2023) (published), the lower court refused to consider ex-husband’s evidence as uncredible in child support modification and Family

Discovery, Family Law: Lower Court’ $68,358 Monetary Sanctions And Issue Sanction Against Ex-Husband For Failing To Produce QuickBooks Flash Drive To Wife’s Accounting Expert Was Sustained On Appeal

Cases: Discovery, Cases: Family Law

CCP § 2023.030 Allowed For The Award, With Willful Discovery Defiance Found By The Lower Court.             A party’s failure to comply with discovery orders can have harsh consequences:  monetary sanctions; issue sanctions; and sometimes even dismissal or directives to enter a default judgment.  Ex-husband found that out in Marriage of Foulk, Case No. C094350

Family Law: After Two Decades Of Dissolution Battles, Husband Obtains $8,179.20 Fees Award For Brining A CCP § 664.6 Motion To Reduce A Marital Settlement Agreement To Judgment

Cases: Family Law

Wife Denied 2030/271 Sanction Requests—The Dissolution Battle May Be Over!             In Marriage of Shepherd, Case No. B322621 (2d Dist., Div. 3 May 4, 2023) (unpublished), two decades after a dissolution action was filed, husband and wife seemingly reached a marital settlement agreement (MSA) resolving all issues, read into the record in a court proceeding. 

Family Law: Although Family Code Section 271 Sanctions Were Justified, The Lower Court’s Sanction Award Was Reduced On Appeal

Cases: Family Law

The Reduction Was Tethered To The Misconduct At Issue.             In Marriage of Dolkhani & Izadpanahi, Case No. B317763 (2d Dist., Div. 7 Mar. 8, 2023) (unpublished), the lower court awarded Family Code section 271 sanctions (attorney’s fees) of $11,605 based on a dissolution litigant’s failure to cooperate in the preparation of a proposed judgment

Family Law: $13,000 Monthly Permanent Spousal Support Order And $175,000 Fees Order Under Needs-Based/Section 271 Grounds Reversed Where Lower Court Failed To Consider Totality Of Ex-Husband’s Ability To Pay Factors

Cases: Family Law

Reversal of Spousal Support Order Parlayed Into Reversal Of Fees Order.             In Kuo v. Liu, Case No. A164928 (1st Dist., Div. 2 Feb. 21, 2023) (unpublished), ex-husband was hit with a $13,000 monthly permanent spousal support payments and a $175,000 fees award to ex-wife under the needs-based Family Code provisions and Family Code section

Family Law: $97,500 Fee Award To Ex-Female Significant Other Under Family Code Section 6344 Is Affirmed On Appeal

Cases: Family Law

Ex-Male Significant Other Had Ability To Pay, But Lower Court Did Not Award Full Fee Request Of $181,042.             Johns v. Cummings, Case No. B313964 (2d Dist., Div. 4 Feb. 17, 2023) (unpublished) involved the aftermath of a romantic relationship between Thomas Cummings, a recording artist, and Whitney Johns, a fitness model/personal trainer, who both

Scroll to Top