Unpublished Case Has A Nice Discussion On Why A Section 271 Sanctions Denial Is Not A Collateral Order.
Unpublished opinions frequently have good discussions on legal issues, which is the case on whether a denial of a Family Code sections 271 request is a collateral order which is immediately appealable.
In Marriage of Zhang and Mo, Case No. H050700 (6th Dist. Jan. 10, 2025) (unpublished), the appellate court dismissed appeal of a lower court’s denial of a Family Code section 271 sanctions request as non-appealable, but it also reversed the denial of a Family Code section 2030 needs-based request because the express findings were not made by the lower court.
On the 271 appeal, the issue was whether the denial order was immediately appealable. After a scholarly review, the appellate court decided it was not, because section 271 orders are frequently ongoing in nature so they should be resolved when a final judgment is reached. In doing so, it distinguished the result on a different sanctions order in Muller v. Fresno Community Hospital & Medical Center, 172 Cal.App.5th 887, 905 (2009).
A different result was reached on the section 2030 issue. The lower court did not make express findings when denying a needs-based award such that a remand was in order. Although the lower court decided no pay stubs were produced, the DCA concluded “we are unaware of any statute or case that authorizes the trial court to summarily deny an otherwise facially adequate section 2030 request solely because pay stubs were not included.” (Slip Op., at 10.)