Cases: Family Law

Appealability, Family Law: Failure To Independently Appeal Family Code Section 271 Sanctions Motion Meant The Merits Could Not Be Reviewed

Cases: Appealability, Cases: Family Law

$25,000 Sanctions Order Was Not Subject To Review.             In Marriage of Freeman, Case No. B311411 (2d Dist., Div. 6 Dec. 6, 2022) (unpublished; opinion after rehearing), ex-wife was peeved she was assessed with Family Code section 2071 sanctions to the tune of $25,000.  However, her challenges could not be entertained because she did not […]

Family Law, Sanctions: $73,000 Fee Award, $220,952 Expert Fee Award, And $200,000 Sanctions Award Under Family Code Section 2107(c) Were Not Erroneous

Cases: Family Law, Cases: Sanctions

Statutory Provision Allows For These Awards Where An Ex-Spouse/Ex-Partner Fails To Satisfy His/Her Disclosure Violations In A Dissolution Proceeding.             Family Code section 2107(c) allows a family law judge to award fees, costs, and sanctions for disclosure violations during a dissolution proceeding, with certain disclosure obligations triggered by the service of the divorce action.  In

Family Law, Sanctions: Husband’s Dismissal of Joinder Complaint Involving Wife’s Brother Did Not Divest Lower Court Of Jurisdiction To Impose Sanctions Against Brother And In Favor Of Husband For Frivolous Motion Under Family Code Section 271

Cases: Family Law, Cases: Sanctions

$58,400 In Sanctions Were Imposed.             In In re Marriage of Blake & Langer, Case No. B311966 (2d Dist., Div. 4 Nov. 10, 2022) (published), husband filed a joinder complaint against wife’s brother and wife’s father in wife’s dissolution action.  Wife’s brother filed a frivolous motion to disqualify husband’s attorneys.  Husband filed a Family Code

Family Law, Substantiation Of Reasonableness Of Fees: Attorney Fee Award To Husband Prevailing In Restraining Order Matter Reversed Due To Lack Of Information Necessary For Trial Court To Perform A Lodestar Calculation

Cases: Family Law, Cases: Substantiation of Reasonableness of Fees

An Unsworn Statement Made By Husband’s Counsel, As To His Hourly Rate And Time Spent Working On The Case, Did Not Support The Trial Court’s Lodestar Calculation.             In Marriage of Halamandaris, Case No. E076933 (4th Dist., Div. 2 October 10, 2022) (unpublished), husband defeated wife’s attempt to obtain a restraining order under the Domestic

Family Law: Family Code Sections 271 And 2030 Fee Awards To Two Ex-Wives, Though Substantial, Were No Abuse Of Discretion

Cases: Family Law

271 Fees Of $400,000 And 2030 Fees Of $60,000 Affirmed On Appeal.             Ex-husband in Marriage of Regalbuto, Case Nos. B310897/B310917 (2d Dist., Div. 3 Sept. 16, 2022) (unpublished) got a “double whammy” in a consolidated domestic violence restraining order (DVRO) trial against two ex-wives.  He lost the trial and, during the way and afterwards,

Family Law: Failure To Rule On Pendente Lite Family Code Section 2030 Early In A Proceeding Resulted In A Reversal Of Reserved Issues Where Self-Represented Wife Bungled Key Trial Issue

Cases: Family Law

Failure To Rule Was Prejudicial, Leading To A Reversal.             Marriage of Knox, Case No. F081092 (5th Dist. Sept. 9, 2022) (published) is a blockbuster decision where a lower court’s failure to promptly rule on a self-represented ex-wife’s request for pendente lite Family Code section 2030 led to reversal on reserved issues when she bungled

Family Law: Section 271 Sanctions Request Must Be Timely Made, But Section 2030 Request Reversed Where It Appeared Ex-Husband Could Bear Fees For Both Sides

Cases: Family Law

Trial Transcript Records Are Key In This Area.             In Marriage of Jensen, Case No. H04948 (6th Dist. Aug. 17, 2022) (unpublished), we picked up on these takeaways: (1) Family Code section 271 sanctions need to be timely requested during family law proceedings; and (2) Family Code section 2030 “needs” based awards need to comply

Family Law: No Abuse of Discretion In Trial Court’s Denial Of Need-Based Fees To Mother Where Clear Disparity Existed Between The Parties’ Ability To Obtain Counsel

Cases: Family Law

Family Code Section 2030 Is Controlled By Section 2032, And Financial Resources Are Only One Factor To Consider In Determining Whether An Award Under Section 2030 Would Be Just And Reasonable.             The trial court denied a $33,000 need-based attorney fees and costs request made by mother in a child custody dispute where it found

Family Law: Marriage of Nakamoto and Hsu Now Published

Cases: Family Law

Section 2030 Needs-Based Trial and Appellate Fees Denied To Husband.             On May 7, 2022, we posted on the then unpublished decision of Marriage of Nakamoto and Hsu, Case No. G059102 (4th Dist., Div. 3 May 4, 2022).  It decided to deny some further section 2020 trial fees and appellate fees to husband for overlitigating

Family Law: Sixth District Finds No Abuse Of Discretion In Trial Court’s Imposition Of $10,000 In Family Code Section 271 Sanctions Against Wife For Failure To Comply With Court Orders

Cases: Family Law

The Record “Unerringly” Demonstrated That Wife’s Refusal To Obey Court Orders Over A More Than Seven-Year Period Was Unreasonable And Unnecessarily Prolonged And Increased The Cost Of The Litigation.             In Marriage of Butler, Case No. H049004 (6th Dist., May 9, 2022) (unpublished), husband and wife entered into a stipulation which was entered as a

Scroll to Top