Marriage of Smith
242 Cal. App. 4th 529
Cal. Ct. App.2015Background
- Marriage dissolution in 2002; ongoing custody/support litigation involving Cindy Smith (Mark's wife) and Kierstin Smith; 2008–2013 proceedings on postjudgment child support, attorney fees, and sanctions; July 3, 2013 trial argument on fees with November 4, 2013 order awarding fees sanctions; court found Kierstin's counsel's conduct unreasonable and characterized litigation as a financial morass intended to financially ruin Cindy and Mark; trial court treated funds paid by Kierstin's father as Kierstin's income for a 2030 analysis; awards were stated as under Family Code sections 2030 and 271; significance of inheritance advances and gifts for relative circumstances addressed; appellate standard of review is abuse of discretion for both 2030 and 271.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether combining 2030 cost shifting with 271 sanctions was error | Kierstin argues no distinct allocations per statute | Smiths contend clear reading supports combined awards | Affirmed; combination permissible if correct under law. |
| Whether trial court properly considered paternal funds as Kierstin income for 2030 | Kierstin's father's payments should be excluded as loans | Payments treated as income or gift; should be considered in 2030 analysis | No abuse; funds properly treated as Kierstin income for 2030. |
| Whether awards would also be proper under 271 was left undecided | If proper under 2030, 271 analysis unnecessary | Differences between 2030 and 271 may affect outcome | Declined to decide; 2030 analysis sufficient to affirm. |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Marriage of Sorge, 202 Cal.App.4th 626 (Cal. Ct. App. 2012) (abuse of discretion standard for 2030 attorney fee awards)
- In re Marriage of Feldman, 153 Cal.App.4th 1470 (Cal. Ct. App. 2007) (abuse of discretion standard for sanctions under 271)
- In re Marriage of Alter, 171 Cal.App.4th 718 (Cal. Ct. App. 2009) (treatment of gifts as income for purposes of support/fees)
- In re Marriage of Williamson, 226 Cal.App.4th 1303 (Cal. Ct. App. 2014) (advancements on inheritance treated as income for 2030/2032)
- In re Marriage of Schulze, 60 Cal.App.4th 519 (Cal. Ct. App. 1997) (parental obligation; charity as not entitlement; nuances of loans vs gifts)
- In re Cryer, 198 Cal.App.4th 1039 (Cal. Ct. App. 2011) (purpose of 2030/2032 relative to cost shifting and litigation burden)