Fourth District, Division Three Holds that Whether the Proceedings Were Brought in Good Faith or in Earnest is Not Correct Legal Standard for Denying Fees.
Park E. Dietz and Laura B. Dietz entered into a stipulated judgment in 1999, in which they divided their community property, including their accounts, and agreed that Park would pay Laura spousal support of $16,500.00 per month until after the death of Laura, the death of Park, the remarriage of Laura, or further order of Court. After Laura reached an age at which she could access her share of retirement benefits without penalty, and had also realized appreciation in securities she owned, Park asked the trial court to decrease his support obligations. The trial court reduced the spousal support obligation and denied Laura’s request for attorney’s fees and costs.
In a 3-0 opinion authored by Justice Fybel, the Court of Appeal reversed, holding that “the trial court erred by concluding the accessibility and increased value of the retirement accounts awarded to Laura in the stipulated judgment constituted a material change of circumstances justifying a decrease in Park’s monthly spousal support obligation.” The stipulated judgment contemplated exactly what had occurred. The Court also remanded for the trial court to reconsider Laura’s request for attorney fees and costs. Marriage of Dietz, G040640 (4th Dist., Div. 3, August 3, 2009) (certified for publication.)
The trial court had not ordered Park to pay Laura’s attorney fees and costs, “because Park had sought the termination or reduction of spousal support in good faith and both parties had access to quality legal assistance.” However, the trial court must consider “‘how to apportion the overall cost of the litigation equitably between the parties under their relative circumstances.'” In re Marriage of Terry, 80 Cal.App.4th 921, 933 (2000).
Thus,the trial court applied the incorrect legal standard:
“The proper legal standard for determining whether to award attorney fees in such proceedings is not whether the proceedings were brought in good faith or in earnest, or even whether the party requesting attorney fees and costs had resources to pay attorney fees without considering other factors. (In re Marriage of Terry, supra, 80 Cal.App.4th at p. 933.) Instead, the trial court is required to determine how to apportion the overall cost of the litigation equitably between the parties under their relative circumstances. (Ibid.) We therefore remand the matter to the trial court to reconsider Laura’s request for attorney fees and costs under the standard set forth, ante..”
Appellant’s attorney Marjorie G. Fuller, is a long-time appellate practitioner in the area of family law. Blawg co-contributor Marc and Marjorie both participated in the William P. Gray Inns of Court in Orange County about 20 years ago, and Marc sends her his regards.