She Had Previously Been Awarded $3.127 Million In Fees.
This next case, authored by Justice Moore on behalf of a 3-0 panel, involves Nevada divorce proceedings relating to prenuptial, marital, and post-marital settlement agreements between Fletcher Jones, Jr. and his ex-wife Kimberly. After Fletcher had previously paid about $3.127 million of her divorce attorneys’ fees, Kimberly moved for additional needs-based fees and was awarded $375,000 more given that there were protracted Nevada proceedings relating to the various agreements and property division.
Fletcher appealed the fee award on numerous grounds.Fletcher’s appeal was not successful in In re Marriage of Jones, Case No. G049640 (4th Dist., Div. 3 May 13, 2015) (unpublished).
Because Fletcher’s wealth dwarfed Kimberly’s, need based fees were justified given testimony that it would take another $1 million to litigate in the Nevada case. The Court of Appeal accepted the notion that the Nevada proceedings were “related” for purposes of fee recovery under Family Code section 2030. Although there were different fee clauses in the various agreements, the post-marital agreement trumped the other two agreements, with a fees clause in the post-marital agreement allowing Kimberly to request more future fees. Finally, even though the Nevada court did rule that Fletcher was entitled to some fees for winning a phase relating to the validity of the pre-nup, that did not mean that comity to Nevada was implicated in having an Orange County judge award further needs based fees to Kimberly.