Family Law News Monthly

Recent dependency law cases, current through 5/22/2023. Written by John Nieman. Read more

Recent family law cases, current through 5/22/2023. Written by Andrew Botros, CFLS Read more

Recent dependency law cases, current through 4/23/2023. Written by John Nieman. Read more

Recent family law cases, current through 4/23/2023. Written by Andrew Botros, CFLS Read more

DEPENDENCY (current through 3/20/2023)By:  John Nieman The precise holdings in a given case are bolded. A.H. v. Superior Court A.H. v. Superior Court03/17/2023, CA 4/3: G061648https://www.courts.ca.gov/opinions/documents/G061648.PDF See summary under FAMILY LAW In re N.M. et al. In re N.M. et al.3/2/23, CA 2/1 B315559https://www.courts.ca.gov/opinions/documents/B315559.PDF Father appealed the granting of sole physical custody upon dismissal. Jurisdiction was originally based upon mother’s driving under the influence of alcohol with a child in the car. Father and mother lived apart then, mother lived… Read more

FAMILY LAW (current through 3/20/2023)By:  Andrew Botros, CFLS The precise holdings in a given case are bolded. In re Marriage of Cohen In re Marriage of Cohen2/16/2023, certified for publication on 3/20/2023, CA 4/3: G060697https://www.courts.ca.gov/opinions/documents/G060697.PDF The Motion to Dismiss in the Trial Court In this case, Husband’s request to modify child support and spousal support was dismissed under the disentitlement doctrine. This part of the order was affirmed. The Court of Appeal first addressed the fact that the trial court… Read more

In this case, the trial court erred in two respects when it signed husband’s QDRO. First, it erroneously used husband’s rank and salary at the time of the parties’ separation to calculate the community interest in his pension instead of his final rank and salary at the time of his retirement, as required by the time rule. This was error because “[u]nder the traditional time rule, the fraction of service during marriage divided by total service must be ‘multiplied by the final plan benefit to determine the community interest.’” and “because the community property interest at issue—the right to retirement benefits—'is a right to draw from a stream of income Read more

FAMILY LAW (current through 1/20/2023)By:  Andrew Botros, CFLS The precise holdings in a given case are bolded. Destiny C. v. Justin C. 01/19/2023, CA 4/1: D553087 https://www.courts.ca.gov/opinions/documents/D079123.PDF Family Code section 3044 creates a rebuttable presumption against awarding custody of a child upon “a finding by the court that a party seeking custody of a child has perpetrated domestic violence within the previous five years…” This five-year period runs backwards from the date of the trial court’s custody ruling, not from… Read more

As to Mother, the Court of Appeal, in dicta, suggested that the trial court could not issue Family Code section 271 sanctions pursuant to its own motion. It noted the absence of such language in Family Code section 271, while also noting that other sanctions statutes explicitly indicate that the trial court could issue sanctions on its own motion. It further noted that in “order to obtain an award under [Family Code section 271], the party requesting an award of attorney’s fees and costs is not required to demonstrate any financial need for the award.” (Emphasis in original.) Read more

The voluntary dismissal of a joinder complaint does not divest the trial court of jurisdiction to award sanctions under Family Code section 271. Although most orders entered after dismissal are void and have no effect, an exception to this rule includes motions related to attorney fees and sanctions. Applying this rule in this manner is consistent with section 271, which is designed to punish parties who have unreasonably increased the cost of litigation. Read more