This is a short review of J.J. Luna’s How To Be Invisible.
Luna describes various methods to legally protect your name, children, and assets. One such method is credit monitoring. Luna stresses that every American should obtain the services of a credit monitoring company. Another one of Luna’s tip is to cease the use of credit cards and pay with cash when possible. Luna also is of the opinion that your home address should be known by very few people. A PO BOX is to be used rather than one’s personal home address in all situations unless there are legal requirements that one use their home address.
The Tax & Legal Playbook, Second Edition, Game-Changing Solutions For Your Small Business Questions. Author: Mark J. Kohler, CPA, Attorney.
In his book, Mark J. Kohler, does an excellent job laying out solutions to real world small business questions. Not only does Kohler provide legal citations but he uses case studies to educate the reader as to how these laws play out in situations small businesses face every day. Here is a quick look at some of the most relevant topics extensively covered by Kohler:
Chapter 2: Sole Proprietorships
Chapter 3: Limited Liability Companies
Chapter 4: S Corporations
Chapter 5: C Corporations
Chapter 6: 199A Pass-Through Deduction Strategies
Chapter 7: Building Personal and Corporate Credit
Chapter 8: Battlefront Asset Protection for your Entity
Chapter 9: The Underutilized Business Tax Deductions
Chapter 10: The New and Improved Vehicle Deduction
Chapter 11: Wise Health-Care Strategies
Chapter 12: Hiring Family Members for Tax Savings
Chapter 13: Buying Rental Properties
Chapter 14: The Importance of Basic Bookkeeping
Chapter 15: Dealing with the IRS
Chapter 16: Tax-Saving Strategies for Selling Property
Chapter 17: Affordable Asset Protection Strategies
Chapter 18: Privacy Measures vs. Hiding Assets
Chapter 19: Protecting your Home from a Lawsuit
Chapter 20: Asset Protection in Marriage and Divorce
Chapter 21: Cutting-Edge Asset Protection Strategies
Chapter 22: Documenting a Partnership
Chapter 23: Bringing on Investors
Chapter 24: Retirement Plan Options
Chapter 25: Self-Directing Your Retirement Funds
Chapter 26: Family Trusts and Estate Planning
The term Q.D.R.O stands for Qualified Domestic Relations Order.
It is a judgment or order that is made under California family law codes and:
Relates to the provision of support or property rights to an “alternate payee”;
Creates, acknowledges, or assigns to an alternate payee a right to rceive benefits under the pension or retirement plan, and
Meets certain statutory requirements.
Congress enacted laws in 1984, making it easier for former spouses to receive a portion of the pension benefits awarded to them. A (QDRO) is a court order, separate from your divorce decree, instructing the Plan Administrator to distribute your share of the retirement benefits to you. If you have been awarded a portion of your former spouse’s pension or retirement benefits, it is very important that a QDRO be prepared, and as soon as possible, here’s why:
[mpinpage]Even if you are awarded one-half of your former spouse’s pension, and he/she dies without a QDRO on file, you will be entitled to nothing.
Your Marital Settlement Agreement awards you your community half of the pension or 401(k) Plan and the Participant cashes it out, the employer is obligated to give it to him/her if there is no QDRO.
If a QDRO was not received by the Plan Administrator before the Participant (your former spouse) actually retires, you lose options and may lose benefits!
Not every pension and 401K plan requires a QDRO. You may contact you or your spouse’s human resource department or retirement plan administrator to determine if you need one. If so, the draft Q.D.R.O. must first be approved by the actual plan before it can be submitted to the Court for approval. This process may proceed quickly or may be delayed for several months depending on the company. After the company approves the QDRO., you and your spouse will need to sign it and it will then be submitted to the Court for the Judge’s signature. The order is then sent to the retirement plan administrator for implementation.
The author of this article, Stan Burman, is a freelance paralegal with over 15 years of experience in California family law matters, including the preparation of QDRO’s.[/mpinpage]
Parties in California dissolution (divorce) proceedings can utilize the same discovery procedures as are used in California civil litigation as the same rules and procedures are applicable unless another statute or rule has been adopted by the California Judicial Council. (Ca Fam § 210.).
The importance of discovery in divorce and other family law litigation cannot be emphasized enough. Utilizing discovery correctly can mean the difference between winning and losing for many divorce cases. Yet many law firms and solo attorneys are so overworked and understaffed that they do not have the time to propound enough discovery on their divorce cases. The result is that many cases which could have been won at trial, or a reasonable settlement reached before trial, instead are lost. The following discovery procedures have been found to be very cost effective in divorce cases.
Form Interrogatories for divorce cases are available using Form FL-145. This form is extremely useful as the questions are specifically tailored to the issues involved in a typical case. For instance a party may ask the other party to provide the last three (3) years tax returns, and also to complete a Schedule of Assets and Debts Form FL-142 if that form is attached to the Form Interrogatories.
Special Interrogatories are also very useful as a party can request the other party to state all facts, identify all persons having knowledge of the facts, and all documents in support of the facts which, support the other party’s request for attorney’s fees, sole custody, spousal support and other requests or contentions made in that party’s Petition or Response.
Additionally, Requests for Production and Inspection of Documents and other Tangible Things can be useful in obtaining bank and financial records and other documents that are pertinent to the divorce proceeding. And a party can demand that the other party allow them to inspect and to photograph, test, or sample any tangible things that are in the possession, custody, or control of the party on whom the demand is made as well as demand that any other party produce and permit the party making the demand, or someone acting on that party’s behalf, to inspect, copy, test, or sample electronically stored information in the possession, custody, or control of the party on whom demand is made. (Ca Civ Pro. § 2031.010).
Thus a party who believes that the other party is hiding assets may demand to inspect their computer, or other electronically stored information. This could be extremely valuable as computer records may show certain websites that were visited such as bank websites for hidden accounts, or e-mails to banks or other parties which have information on where hidden assets are located. And many people keep a spreadsheet or other list of their assets on their computer thinking that their spouse will never find it.
And last but not least, Requests for Admission can be used to request the other party admit or deny certain pertinent facts, and/or admit that certain attached documents are genuine.
The California courts have ruled that the scope of discovery in California litigation is very broad. Any doubts are applied liberally in favor of discovery.
For discovery purposes, information is relevant if it might reasonably assist a party in evaluating case, preparing for trial, or facilitating settlement. Gonzalez v. Superior Court (City of San Fernando (1995) 33 Cal.App.4th 1539, 1546.
Admissibility is not the test and information, unless privileged, is discoverable if it might reasonably lead to admissible evidence. Davies v. Superior Court (1984) 36 Cal.3d 291, 301.
These rules are applied liberally in favor of discovery. Colonial Life & Accident Ins. Co. v. Superior Court (1982) 31 Cal.3d 785, 790, and (contrary to popular belief), fishing expeditions are permissible in some cases. Greyhound Corp. v. Superior Court (1961) 56 Cal.2d 355, 385, (“although fishing may be improper or abused in some cases, that “is not of itself an indictment of the fishing expedition per se”).
Clearly then, propounding discovery is a vital tool in (1) evaluating the strengths and weaknesses of each party’s case; (2) preparing for trial, and (3) facilitating settlement.
Form and special interrogatories, request for admissions, and requests for production and inspection of documents and other tangible things all need to be utilized so that the facts, witnesses and documents that support the opposing party’s claims or defenses can be ascertained, deposed and reviewed, and getting certain admissions or denials of issues relevant to the divorce on record before the trial.
This blog post gives an overview of the uncontested California dissolution (“divorce”) filing process and a summary of the divorce papers that are typically filed with the family law or domestic relations clerk. This overview is not intended to be an exact step-by-step guide for those “do it yourself divorce” filers, due to the fact that many cases are unique and there are other methods of obtaining an uncontested divorce in California.
In California the term “irreconcilable differences” describes No-Fault divorce. It means that “irreconcilable differences have caused an irremediable breakdown of the marriage.”
In California, as in other states, divorces may be either contested or uncontested, but uncontested, No-Fault divorces move through the courts more quickly and less expensively.
California is a community property state. This means that assets and liabilities are either community property (half is one spouse’s, half the other’s, such as the marital home acquired during the marriage), or separate property (one spouse’s alone, such as gifts and inheritances).
In California, the party who files is called the Petitioner; the party who answers is called the Respondent. The divorce is filed in the Superior Court, normally the county of residence of the couple. One spouse or the other must have lived in California for at least six months and in the county where the divorce is being filed for at least three months. Moreover, there is a six-month waiting period after the service of process or an Answer by the Respondent before the divorce becomes final.
Most of the forms used in divorce in California are those adopted by the California Judicial Council, and their use is mandatory. County courts also have forms that may be used in compliance with local rules governing divorce.
California permits what is called a Summary Dissolution of Marriage. Also called a simplified or special dissolution of marriage, a summary action is an inexpensive and easy way to divorce for those couples who qualify, but both the husband and wife must be certain they want to go this route because either can change his or her mind during the six-month waiting period between the filing and the finalization of the action. To qualify for this divorce routine, a couple must meet certain requirements, see this blog post http://wp.me/ps4Uj-W for more information on a Summary Dissolution.
The procedural requirements for an uncontested divorce come from California statutes, the California rules of Court, and the local rules of court. Depending on the situation, the couple will file a variety of court papers. These include a property settlement agreement dividing community property (the martial estate) and establishing the terms and conditions of child care and spousal support.
However, the basic steps for an uncontested divorce are as follows:
1. File a petition asking the court to grant a divorce.
2. Notification of the other spouse that a divorce has been filed. This entails serving the other spouse with a copy of the Summons- Family Law, Petition, a blank Response form, and may include other forms especially if there are minor children involved.
3. Exchange Preliminary Declarations of Disclosure, or if the other spouse does not cooperate the Petition needs to serve a Preliminary Declaration of Disclosure including a Schedule of Assets and Debts and an Income and Expense Declaration. The Final Declaration of Disclosure can be waived by both parties, however the Preliminary cannot be waived.
4. If both parties agree a Marital Settlement Agreement is then prepared which outlines the agreement of the parties regarding child custody/visitation/support if applicable, spousal support if applicable, and division of property and debts. If the other spouse does not cooperate and does not respond to the Petition, then a Request to Enter Default must be filed along with a Request for a Default Hearing.
5. Submit the Marital Settlement Agreement and other final paperwork to the Court for processing. If both parties agree then no Court appearance will be required. If a default hearing is involved then a Property Declaration and an Income and Expense Declaration must be submitted to the Court before the Default Hearing. At the hearing a proposed Judgment must be submitted to the Clerk before the Judge hears the case. If the Judge agrees with the proposed Judgment they will sign it which will finalize the divorce.
In all cases, the divorce begins with the Petition, the Summons-Family Law, Response and any local forms that may be required by the county court. The Petition, the Summons-Family Law, Response and any local forms that may be required are normally served by a process server and may not be hand-delivered to the other spouse by the Petitioner because he or she is a party to the action. This is called Service of Process. Other forms may normally be mailed to the other party by first class mail.
Divorcing a missing spouse — one who cannot or will not be located -requires a good faith effort at locating him or her, followed by ex parte (without notice) application to the court for Service by Publication. In this regime, the Petitioner must first make a good faith (or “diligent”) search for his or her missing spouse. This search normally includes checking telephone directories in the area where both the petitioner and respondent live or lived, asking friends and relatives, checking tax records, contacting the department of motor vehicles, voter registration, etc. After a diligent but fruitless search has been made, the court approves an application to the court of Service by Publication.
This requires the completion of a form, Ex Parte Application for Publication of Summons; Declaration in Support Thereof; Memorandum of Points and Authorities as well as Order for Publication of Summons. After these have been approved, the summons can be published in a newspaper. The summons must be published once a week for four successive weeks, with a least five days between successive publications.
The Petition, which must be completed in all cases, identifies the Petitioner and Respondent, the date of the marriage, the date of separation, the minor children (if any), makes a declaration of the community and quasi-community assets and debts and states the relief sought. Depending on the situation — that is, whether or not the couple are in agreement — other forms (see below) may be accompanied with the Petition. For example, if there are minor children of the marriage, the petitioner must file the Declaration Under Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act (UCCJEA), and attach it to the petition.
The Summons-Family Law is the Notice to the Respondent that a divorce has been filed by the Petitioner. It gives him or her 30 days to respond and carries with it a warning that failure to respond may result in a default judgment against him or her. The Summons also restrains both parties from removing minor children from the state and dissipating marital assets without the written consent of the other party, or a Court order.
After one spouse files, uncontested divorces evolve in one of two ways.
The first is when the spouses agree on every issue: asset and liability division, the terms and conditions of child custody, support and visitation, alimony. A divorce can be said to be uncontested when the spouses do the fighting before going to court, come to an agreement, and the judge then approves it if it is fair and reasonable.
The second way happens when the Respondent does not respond to the petition for divorce. In addition, sometimes the responding spouse cannot be located. Sometimes divorcing spouses agree that the responding spouse will default. This is not collusion, and divorce proceeds through the court with his or her agreement.
When a couple agree on all issues, or when either defaults, the court may issue Judgment either by Declaration without an appearance in Court, or a Default Judgment after a Court hearing. As stated previously, if both parties agree then a Court appearance will not be required. After a summary action, an uncontested action coursing along this default route is probably the easiest route to a divorce.
The trajectory of a contested divorce is difficult to predict because it is litigation, and it is adversarial. A contested divorce begins with the same filing procedure, then often one of the parties will request an Order to Show Cause Hearing, after which the judge will rule on temporary support, child custody and restraining orders.
The parties then may engage in Discovery, which becomes far more invasive and complicated than the voluntary disclosures made in an uncontested action. In both uncontested and contested actions, the Preliminary Declaration of Disclosure is used as well as the disclosure of current expenses and incomes.
After Discovery, the parties and the lawyers attempt to settle the case through negotiations. If they reach an accord, one of the lawyers prepares a MSA based on California’s community property divorce law. This is a contract signed by the parties and their lawyers. But if this fails, the parties go to trial.
Clearly if both parties can agree on all, or most of the issues, they can save a lot of time and money by proceeding with an Uncontested Divorce.
This blog post gives an overview of the Bifurcation process as it applies to California dissolution (“Divorce”) proceedings.
It can take many months, even several years, for a contested divorce to wind its way through the courts. Faced with this fact, many spouses want to terminate the marriage quickly, even if the other issues in the case have not been settled. There might also be situations in which it makes sense to have a separate trial of a particular issue.
In both of those situations, the court will order that the trial is to be “bifurcated.” This means either that the marital status is terminated and the parties are restored to their single status or a separate trial is to be held concerning a specific issue.
Bifurcation to Terminate the Marital Status
Bifurcations are generally requested because one or both of the spouses want to remarry. They are also sought because one or both of them want to file their tax returns for the current year as a “single” taxpayer.
The tax laws state that a person can file as a “single” person as long as his or her marital status was terminated before the end of the year. Thus, even if the marital status is ended on December 31st, the taxpayer can file as a “single” person for the entire year.
This can be significant, particularly for the person who is paying spousal or “family” support.
Payments of spousal and family support are 100% deductible for the person who is ordered to make those payments. Conversely, spousal and family support payments must be reported as income by the person receiving them. Income tax laws provide that these support payments are not deductible if the spouses file a joint tax return.
Bifurcation of Trial Issues
The court can also bifurcate the trial of certain issues. For example, where there is a family business that was owned before the marriage, the spouses might disagree as to whether it is community property or the separate property and what it is worth. If the business is ultimately found to be the separate property of the spouse who started it, the value of the business would be irrelevant. In such a case, the judge might order that there will be a bifurcated trial to first determine if the business is community property or separate property. If the result of that trial is a finding that the business is community property, then there would be a trial on the value to be placed on it.
The law provides that the marital status can be terminated not less than six months from when the Respondent was served with the Petition for Divorce. So, only cases in which the Respondent was served before July 1st can be bifurcated during that year.
Procedure to Obtain Bifurcation
Most courts require the filing of a motion for bifurcation, although some courts allow it to be done simply by filing a written stipulation. If a motion is required, the appropriate court papers must be prepared, which must then be filed with copies mailed to the spouse or his/her attorney. Approximately 3-6 weeks after the motion is filed, the requesting spouse and his/her attorney if they have one have to appear before the judge, who will almost always grant the request.
California law favors bifurcation in the absence of particularized, compelling reasons to the contrary. Under this approach, bifurcation will be granted for almost any reason, such as possible tax advantages, fewer constraints in social and financial matters, or the fact that the property issues will require more discovery and a more lengthy trial.
For example, in Gionis v. Superior Court (1988) 202 Cal. App. 3d 786, 788-790, the California Court of Appeal held that a request for bifurcation does not have to be justified by a compelling showing of need, and that on the contrary a spouse opposing bifurcation must present compelling reasons for denial. Reviewing California case law, the court found that bifurcation was a favored procedure because it implemented the policy underlying no-fault divorce. The court noted that the state’s high court had endorsed the concept of bifurcation in these terms:
“Severance of a personal relationship which the law has found to be unworkable and, as a result, injurious to the public welfare is not dependent upon final settlement of property disputes. Society will be little concerned if the parties engage in property litigation of however long duration; it will be much concerned if two people are forced to remain legally bound to one another when this status can do nothing but engender additional bitterness and unhappiness.” Hull v. Superior Court (1960) 54 Cal. 2d 139, 147.
While the granting of a request for bifurcation of the marital status is virtually automatic, there are some prerequisites and conditions that must be followed by the requesting party. Initially, the party requesting bifurcation must serve his or her preliminary declaration of disclosure on the other spouse before the request for bifurcation is filed.
The judge will usually impose certain “conditions” on the granting of a bifurcation. These include:
(1) The obligation to reimburse opposing party for any tax consequences or loss of right to claim probate homestead or family allowance; (2) The employee-spouse must maintain existing medical insurance for the other spouse; (3) The employee-spouse must indemnify the other spouse for loss of pension death benefits. In addition, the law requires that, before a bifurcation is granted, the pension plans of the spouses must be joined in the divorce case.
The condition that existing medial insurance be maintained is particularly significant. Under that condition, the spouse requesting bifurcation must maintain existing medical insurance for the other spouse. If such coverage is no longer available, the requesting spouse must purchase medical insurance for the spouse that provides coverage that is comparable to the existing coverage. If such insurance is not available, the requesting spouse must pay for all medical bills incurred by the other spouse that would have been paid by the existing medical coverage.
As discussed above, a person can file as a “single” taxpayer for the entire year, as long as the marital status was terminated sometime in that year, even as late as December 31st. This is why there is usually a flood of bifurcation motions filed at the end of the year. To be assured that the clerk places a bifurcation motion on the court’s calendar before the end of the year, the motion should be filed not later than November 15th.
The California Family Code provides a very useful method to obtain income and expense information from another party before commencing a modification or termination proceeding for child, family or spousal support. The relevant statutes are contained in Chapter 6, Article 3 of the California Family Code, sections 3660 through 3668.
These statutes allow a party to serve a request for an income and expense declaration on the other party before they file an Order to Show Cause or Notice of Motion to modify or terminate child, family or spousal support.
The California Legislature states that the purpose of these statutes is to permit inexpensive discovery of facts before the commencement of a proceeding for modification or termination of an order for child, family, or spousal support. See (Ca Fam § 3660).
These status provide the only method of discovery before filing any Order to Show Cause or Notice of Motion to modify or terminate child, family or spousal support. Other methods of discovery may only be used if a motion is pending. See (Ca Fam § 3662).
In the absence of a pending motion for modification or termination of a support order, a request for discovery pursuant to this article may be undertaken not more frequently than once every 12 months. See (Ca Fam § 3663).
The procedure and relevant rules for using this method to obtain income and expense information from another party before commencing a modification or termination proceeding for child, family or spousal support are as follows:
At any time following a judgment of dissolution of marriage or legal separation of the parties, or a determination of paternity, that provides for payment of support, either the party ordered to pay support or the party to whom support was ordered to be paid or that party’s assignee, without leave of court, may serve a request on the other party for the production of a completed current income and expense declaration in the form adopted by the Judicial Council. See (Ca Fam § 3664(a)).
If there is no response within 35 days of service of the request or if the responsive income and expense declaration is incomplete as to any wage information, including the attachment of pay stubs and income tax returns, the requesting party may serve a request on the employer of the other party for information limited to the income and benefits provided to the party in the form adopted by the Judicial Council. The employer may require the requesting party to pay the reasonable costs of copying this information for the requesting party. The date specified in the request served on the employer for the production of income and benefit information shall not be less than 15 days from the date this request is issued. See (Ca Fam § 3664(b)).
The requesting party shall serve or cause to be served on the employee described in this section or on his or her attorney a copy of the request served on the employer prior to the date specified in the request served on the employer for the production of income and benefit information. This copy shall be accompanied by a notice that, in a typeface that is intended to call attention to its terms, indicates all of the following: (1) That information limited to the income and benefits provided to the employee by his or her employer is being sought from the employer named in the request for production. (2) That the information may be protected by right of privacy. (3) That, if the employee objects to the production of this information by the employer to the requesting party, the employee shall notify the court, in writing, of this objection prior to the date specified in the request served on the employer for the production of income and benefit information. (4) That, if the requesting party does not agree, in writing, to cancel or narrow the scope of the request for the production of this information by the employer, the employee should consult an attorney regarding the employee’s right to privacy and how to protect this right. See (Ca Fam § 3664(c)).
The employee described in this section may, prior to the date specified in the request served on the employer for the production of income and benefit information, bring a motion pursuant to Section 1987.1 of the Code of Civil Procedure to quash or modify this request in the same manner as a subpoena duces tecum. Notice of this motion shall be given to the employer prior to the date specified in the request served on the employer for the production of income and benefit information. No employer shall be required to produce information limited to the income and benefits of the employee, except upon order of the court or upon agreement of the parties, employers, and employee affected. See (Ca Fam § 3664(d)).
Service of a request for production of an income and expense declaration or for income and benefit information pursuant to this section or a copy thereof shall be by certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, to the last known address of the party to be served, or by personal service. See (Ca Fam § 3664(f)).
Note that the code does not require service of the request on the attorney for the other party although it is probably a good idea to mail a courtesy copy to them assuming that they are still the attorney of record.
Family Code Section 3665 states that, “
(a) A copy of the prior year’s federal and state personal income tax returns shall be attached to the income and expense declaration of each party.
(b) A party shall not disclose the contents or provide copies of the other party’s tax returns to anyone except the court, the party’s attorney, the party’s accountant, or other financial consultant assisting with matters relating to the proceeding, or any other person permitted by the court.
(c) The tax returns shall be controlled by the court as provided in Section 3552. 3666. This article may be enforced in the manner specified in Sections 1991, 1991.1, 1991.2, 1992, and 1993 of the Code of Civil Procedure and in the Civil Discovery Act (Title 4 (commencing with Section 2016.010) of Part 4 of the Code of Civil Procedure), and any other statutes applicable to the enforcement of procedures for discovery. 3667. Upon the subsequent filing of a motion for modification or termination of the support order by the requesting party, if the court finds that the income and expense declaration submitted by the responding party pursuant to this article was incomplete, inaccurate, or missing the prior year’s federal and state personal income tax returns, or that the declaration was not submitted in good faith, the court may order sanctions against the responding party in the form of payment of all costs of the motion, including the filing fee and the costs of the depositions and subpoenas necessary to be utilized in order to obtain complete and accurate information. This section is applicable regardless of whether a party has utilized subdivision (b) of Section 3664.”
As stated in this blog post the method described above is an extremely useful tool to obtain income and expense information from another party before commencing a modification or termination proceeding for child, family or spousal support. In fact it is the only method that can be used before commencing any modification or termination proceeding. It truly does provide an inexpensive method of obtaining the facts necessary to determine whether or not to commence a modification or termination proceeding.
Many parties involved in dissolution (divorce) litigation in California are not aware that the Courts have the power to order that the other party to the proceeding pay a reasonable amount to allow a party who is representing themselves, known in California as “In Pro Per” to retain an attorney in a timely manner before proceedings in the matter go forward. The relevant statutes are contained in Chapter 3.5 of the California Family Code, sections 2030 through 2034. These statutes can be very useful for a party who does not presently have the funds to retain an attorney and has a pending trial or hearing.
In other words if a prospective client who is currently representing themselves without an attorney wishes to retain an attorney they can ask the Court to order the other party to pay so that they can retain an attorney before any trial or hearing. See California Family Code § 2030(b).
And the Court has the authority to make an attorney fees award without notice by an oral motion at the time of a hearing on the cause of the merits. See California Family Code § 2031(b)(1), and at any time before entry of judgment against a party whose default has been entered pursuant to Section 585 or 586 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The court shall rule on any motion made pursuant to this subdivision within 15 days and prior to the entry of any judgment. See California Family Code § 2031(b)(2).
The court has power to impose additional fees than those requested if it determines that the adverse party failed to cooperate in family law proceedings. In re Marriage of Quay 18 Cal. App.4th 961, 970 (1993).
The family law judge has discretion to create a “judicial lien” on community or separate property in order to secure payment of section 2030 fees. See California Family Code § 2032[c].
The use of this procedure allows a party who is currently representing themselves without an attorney to “level the playing field”. And the procedure allows them to make such a request by an oral motion at the time of any trial or hearing. This is very advantageous to many family law litigants as many of them wish to retain an attorney but cannot afford to pay the thousands of dollars most attorneys charge as an upfront retainer.
In fact the California Supreme Court has stated that it is the public policy in California that both spouses have the ability to obtain effective legal representation.
California’s public policy in favor of expeditious and final resolution of marital dissolution actions is best accomplished by providing at the outset of litigation, consistent with the financial circumstances of the parties, a parity between spouses in their ability to obtain effective legal representation. Droeger v. Friedman, Sloan & Ross 54 Cal.3d 26, 41, fn. 12 (1991).