Even If Explanations Could Have Been Clearer, No Prejudice Shown By Appealing Ex-Wife.
Presence of prejudice is a critical factor in any appeal. The next case, Marriage of Effner, Case No. D074478 (4th Dist., Div. 1 May 18, 2020) (unpublished), so demonstrates.
There, ex-wife—who was found by the lower court to have diverted assets to her own benefit—was hit with Family Code section 271 sanctions of $15,000 and with attorney’s fees under Family Code section 1101(g) for not being candid with respect to treatment of assets.
The appellate court affirmed these orders. Ex-wife could point to no support for her argument that the trial judge had to make a detailed explanation on her ability to pay with respect to the section 271 sanctions given his rather pointed remarks at the oral hearing. On the section 1101(g) issue, ability to pay is a concern and the lower court’s reasoning was somewhat cursory, but no prejudice was demonstrated based on its comments on the section 271 sanctions issue (which inferentially tended to show ex-wife did have the financial resources to pay the fees order).
Comments