Family Law: Second District, Division 7 Affirms $30,000 “Needs” Fees Award To Wife

Panel Quotes From Fourth District, Division 3 Colleagues in the Process.

     Who says appellate justices don’t read and admire the prose from fellow colleagues in the other state Courts of Appeal? Not us, as the next case demonstrates.

     Marriage of Silverman, Case No. B208172 (2d Dist., Div. 7 Sept. 8, 2009) (unpublished) involved a fairly routine affirmance of a $30,000 “needs” based award under Family Code section 2030 to wife. After all, attorney was a husband and wife was a full-time homemaker lacking a college education, with obvious financial and income-making disparities.

     However, what makes this decision fun reading is Presiding Justice Perluss’s citation to quotes from two of his counterparts in the Fourth District, Division 3. He cites to Presiding Justice Sills’s “own distinctive manner” when quoting from Alan S. v. Superior Court, 172 Cal.App.4th 238 (2009) (a comment with which we agree, as shown by our post on Alan S. on March 21, 2009). Later, he rejects one of husband’s arguments by quoting Justice Bedsworth, described “as Presiding Justice Sills’s equally colorful colleague,” who rebuffed an argument by saying “hogwash” (Wells Fargo Bank Minnesota, N.A. v. B.C.B.U., 143 Cal.App.4th 493, 502 (2006) [“That is—not to put too fine a point on it—hogwash.”]).

     So, we know that at least one Second District justice likes what he reads—often times with amusement—from justices authoring opinions in the Santa Ana Court of Appeal.

The Cheshire Cat

Scroll to Top