Court Notes that Family Code Section 271 Sanctions Are Broader in Scope.
An important reminder for family law practitioners comes from Marriage of DeMarco, Case No. D055009 (4th Dist., Div. 1 Apr. 22, 2010) (unpublished).
There, the appellate court reversed a $50,000 sanctions/fee award granted against a husband for breaching his fiduciary duties to his wife in a divorce proceeding. The Court of Appeal found that the section allowing for recoupment of fees with respect to such a violation, Family Code section 2107(c), is much more narrow that Family Code section 271, which confers the trial court with authority to impose sanctions for a broader range of conduct than section 2107. Finding that a breach of fiduciary duty was not demonstrated, the appellate court reversed the $50,000 award. This distinction between these two sections is one that should be kept in mind when family law contestants move for “sanction” fee awards under the Family Code.
BLOG OBSERVATION—The husband is this case was not James R. DeMarco, an attorney that co-contributors Marc and Mike worked with at Jackson DeMarco Tidus & Peckenpaugh in Irvine. Marc and Mike send their greetings to Jim. Nor is the husband the late Frank DeMarco, President Nixon’s former tax attorney, and the subject of a federal prosecution dismissed by the late Justice Warren Ferguson (with whom Marc clerked), after Justice Ferguson determined that the conduct of the government had deprived Mr. DeMarco of a fair trial. Nor is the husband any relation to Don Juan DeMarco.