Interestingly Enough, Ex-Husband Did Obtain DVRO Against Ex-Wife Involving Three Sons.
The next case, Yurasek v. Kesala, Case No. A158859 (1st Dist., Div. 2 Dec. 2, 2020) (unpublished), is an interesting reminder to be careful what box you check in family law forms. If you go broad and check some boxes for wide relief, it may invite an award of needs-based fees for collateral issues in a proceeding where you ultimately prevailed—but got tagged with attorney’s fees nonetheless for a related dispute that you put at issue.
In this one, the ex-husband and ex-wife were well-educated professionals in an 18-year marriage with three sons. However, in connection with divorce proceedings, ex-husband brought a domestic violence restraining order (DVRO) proceeding involving the ex-wife and three sons, with a DVRO eventually being entered against ex-wife on certain terms. However, during the DVRO “trial,” ex-wife requested $150,000 in needs-based fees under Family Code section 2030 in connection with a change of custody dispute. The lower court, after multiple hearings and requiring an apportionment of fees, granted ex-wife $80,000 in fees, prompting ex-husband to appeal.
The 1/2 DCA affirmed because the DVRO proceeding was related enough to the custody issues given that ex-husband had checked boxes acknowledging that the custody controversy was closely enough involved in the DVRO proceeding.