TRY ME!
Attorney Fees In California
Summary
Attorney fees in California can be awarded under Family Code 271 if actions increase litigation costs or frustrate settlement efforts. Filing meritless ex parte requests, especially with a history of using the court as a threat, may justify fees. Courts assess intent, impact, and any documented threats. For restraining orders, courts evaluate ongoing threats, compliance, and changes in circumstances. Violations and lack of accountability can support extending a DVRO. Attorneys may refuse cases due to conflicts of interest but generally do not maintain a blacklist for clients.Full Conversation
Under what types of circumstances are attorney's fees typically awarded pursuant to California Family Code * or to renewals of domestic violence restraining orders?
In California, attorney's fees may be awarded under Family Code * and in renewals of domestic violence restraining orders under these circumstances:
- Family Code *: Fees are awarded as a sanction to encourage cooperation and discourage unnecessary litigation. It applies when a party's conduct frustrates settlement efforts.
- Domestic Violence Restraining Orders: Fees might be awarded if one party has a need and the other has the ability to pay, promoting access to legal representation.
If you have more details or specific questions, feel free to ask!
- Family Code *: Fees are awarded as a sanction to encourage cooperation and discourage unnecessary litigation. It applies when a party's conduct frustrates settlement efforts.
- Domestic Violence Restraining Orders: Fees might be awarded if one party has a need and the other has the ability to pay, promoting access to legal representation.
If you have more details or specific questions, feel free to ask!
Would filing multiple requests as ex parte, despite there being no basis for the requests being ex parte (no emergency), as well as the first filing being denied, with the judge stating that the filing had no reason being an ex parte, then the second request being an ex parte request that is also meritless, be sufficient grounds upon which to base a request to grant attorney's fees pursuant to CFC *?
Filing meritless ex parte requests could potentially justify attorney's fees under California Family Code * if it frustrates settlement efforts or cooperation. The court considers whether such actions unnecessarily increased litigation costs. Would you like to discuss this matter with a local lawyer for further assistance?
Is there any case law for attorney's fees being awarded on the basis of meritless, frivolous ex parte requests?
Case Rating: *
California courts have addressed awarding attorney's fees for frivolous or meritless legal actions under Family Code *. While specific case law may vary, courts often consider the unnecessary increase in litigation costs. Examples include In re Marriage of Daniels and In re Marriage of Falcone & Fyke. Would you like more details on these cases?
California courts have addressed awarding attorney's fees for frivolous or meritless legal actions under Family Code *. While specific case law may vary, courts often consider the unnecessary increase in litigation costs. Examples include In re Marriage of Daniels and In re Marriage of Falcone & Fyke. Would you like more details on these cases?
To what extent do their actions need to increase litigation costs in order for attorney's fees to be awarded? Can the filings simply being meritless and inconvenient warrant attorney's fees?
Case Rating: *
In California, for attorney's fees to be awarded under Family Code *, the actions typically need to significantly increase litigation costs or frustrate settlement efforts. Simply being meritless and inconvenient might not suffice unless they are shown to cause unnecessary expenses or delays. Would you like more information on how courts assess increased costs in such cases?
In California, for attorney's fees to be awarded under Family Code *, the actions typically need to significantly increase litigation costs or frustrate settlement efforts. Simply being meritless and inconvenient might not suffice unless they are shown to cause unnecessary expenses or delays. Would you like more information on how courts assess increased costs in such cases?
What if there is a 3 year restraining order that is going to expire in just a few months and the other party filed an ex parte request to remove the restraining order, rather than just waiting the remaining few months for it to expire? Could that be seen as causing an unnecessary increase in litigation costs?
Case Rating: *
Filing an ex parte request to remove a restraining order close to its expiration could be perceived as unnecessary and potentially increasing litigation costs. Whether it warrants attorney's fees under Family Code * depends on the court's assessment of the intention and impact on litigation. Would you like to explore more on how courts evaluate such situations?
Filing an ex parte request to remove a restraining order close to its expiration could be perceived as unnecessary and potentially increasing litigation costs. Whether it warrants attorney's fees under Family Code * depends on the court's assessment of the intention and impact on litigation. Would you like to explore more on how courts evaluate such situations?
Sure
Case Rating: *
In such scenarios, courts typically assess:
- Intent behind filing the ex parte request.
- Actual impact on litigation costs.
- Whether the action frustrated settlement efforts.
These factors help determine if attorney's fees should be awarded. Would you like to discuss any specific aspect further?
In such scenarios, courts typically assess:
- Intent behind filing the ex parte request.
- Actual impact on litigation costs.
- Whether the action frustrated settlement efforts.
These factors help determine if attorney's fees should be awarded. Would you like to discuss any specific aspect further?
What if the other party has around * documented instances of them threatening to user court against us? With the filing being unnecessary and meritless, as well as their history of threatening to use the court as a method of harassment/intimidation, could there be a basis upon which to impose attorney's fees as sanctions?
Case Rating: *
Threatening to use the court for harassment or intimidation, especially with documented instances, could potentially justify attorney's fees under California Family Code *. The court would consider if these actions increase litigation costs or frustrate settlement efforts. Would you like to discuss more about how to approach this legally?
Threatening to use the court for harassment or intimidation, especially with documented instances, could potentially justify attorney's fees under California Family Code *. The court would consider if these actions increase litigation costs or frustrate settlement efforts. Would you like to discuss more about how to approach this legally?
Do the courts not take into consideration as heavily what the intent was behind the filing, given the history of using the court as a threat?
Case Rating: *
Courts do consider the intent behind filings, especially if there's a documented history of using the court as a threat. Intent is crucial in determining whether actions are frivolous and whether they increase litigation costs or frustrate settlement efforts, potentially justifying attorney's fees under Family Code *.
Courts do consider the intent behind filings, especially if there's a documented history of using the court as a threat. Intent is crucial in determining whether actions are frivolous and whether they increase litigation costs or frustrate settlement efforts, potentially justifying attorney's fees under Family Code *.
What if the other party repeatedly threatened to take us to court in order to give custody of our son to his biological father? Once we got the restraining order against him, merely a month later we were taken to court for the custody case. The other parent didn't show up to court so clearly he did not care to get custody of his own child, and we were ultimately able to terminate his rights. But, would the other party making these threats and then ultimately following through with them mean anything? Or would the courts just say "the father was within his right to file the custody request"?
Case Rating: *
In California, the court considers the intent and impact of legal actions. While the father has the right to file for custody, documented threats and actions that seem to harass may be scrutinized. Courts assess if these actions unnecessarily increase litigation costs or frustrate settlement efforts.
In California, the court considers the intent and impact of legal actions. While the father has the right to file for custody, documented threats and actions that seem to harass may be scrutinized. Courts assess if these actions unnecessarily increase litigation costs or frustrate settlement efforts.
So, given these actions by the other party, and that the restraining order granted against him protected both us and the son in question, is there any chance that the son would be removed from the restraining order if the other party didn't abuse said son and they petitioned to have him removed from the protection so as to continue grandparent visitation?
Case Rating: *
If the restraining order protects your son, removing him from it would typically require a court review. The court will consider factors like the child's safety, the necessity of protection, and the potential benefits of visitation. It may be challenging if there's no history of abuse towards the son, but the court prioritizes safety. Would you like to explore other aspects or discuss further legal steps?
If the restraining order protects your son, removing him from it would typically require a court review. The court will consider factors like the child's safety, the necessity of protection, and the potential benefits of visitation. It may be challenging if there's no history of abuse towards the son, but the court prioritizes safety. Would you like to explore other aspects or discuss further legal steps?
If the restraining order was granted protecting the son to begin with, isn't that sufficient grounds to say that the restraining order should remain active as it was initially granted?
Case Rating: *
If the restraining order was initially granted to protect your son, it suggests the court found sufficient grounds for its necessity. Maintaining it would depend on whether conditions have changed. Continued protection may be justified if concerns for your son's safety persist. Would you like to explore any specific legal steps or considerations?
If the restraining order was initially granted to protect your son, it suggests the court found sufficient grounds for its necessity. Maintaining it would depend on whether conditions have changed. Continued protection may be justified if concerns for your son's safety persist. Would you like to explore any specific legal steps or considerations?
Gotcha. If the other party says they took an anger management and co-parenting class but did not attach any certificates of completion, and they just say that the restraining order should have never been granted in the first place, I'm assuming that's not sufficient grounds upon which to have the restraining order modified?
Case Rating: *
In California, simply stating that classes were taken without proof, like certificates, is generally insufficient to modify a restraining order. The court typically needs substantial evidence demonstrating changed circumstances or no longer needing the order. Would you like to explore more about the modification process?
In California, simply stating that classes were taken without proof, like certificates, is generally insufficient to modify a restraining order. The court typically needs substantial evidence demonstrating changed circumstances or no longer needing the order. Would you like to explore more about the modification process?
Would the other party's lack of accountability play a factor in further arguing that circumstances have not changed?
Case Rating: *
In California, a lack of accountability from the other party can influence the court's decision. Courts consider whether the circumstances have changed significantly and if the other party shows genuine effort towards improvement. A lack of accountability might support the argument that circumstances remain unchanged. Would you like more information on how to present this argument effectively in court?
In California, a lack of accountability from the other party can influence the court's decision. Courts consider whether the circumstances have changed significantly and if the other party shows genuine effort towards improvement. A lack of accountability might support the argument that circumstances remain unchanged. Would you like more information on how to present this argument effectively in court?
What sort of things are considered when a request to extend a domestic violence restraining order is heard?
Case Rating: *
When considering a request to extend a domestic violence restraining order in California, the court typically evaluates:
- Evidence of ongoing threat or harm.
- Compliance with the existing order.
- Changes in circumstances since the last order.
- Testimonies from involved parties.
- Safety and well-being of protected individuals.
Feel free to ask if you need more details!
When considering a request to extend a domestic violence restraining order in California, the court typically evaluates:
- Evidence of ongoing threat or harm.
- Compliance with the existing order.
- Changes in circumstances since the last order.
- Testimonies from involved parties.
- Safety and well-being of protected individuals.
Feel free to ask if you need more details!
If there have been six restraining order violations (sending gifts, sending his sister, sending a chocolate penis that says "EAT A DICK", although we don't have proof that it traces back to him but we had just received a package from him a few days prior), no accountability for the abuse, and statements such as "they only got the restraining order to hurt me" and "I believe the restraining order should be null and void" and "they only got the restraining order because of judicial misconduct", I'm assuming that's pretty sufficient evidence to say that circumstances surrounding the abuse have not changed and the DVRO should be extended?
Case Rating: *
The violations you described, along with the lack of accountability, can strengthen your case to extend the DVRO. Would you like to be connected to local lawyers who can better assist you with your case?
The violations you described, along with the lack of accountability, can strengthen your case to extend the DVRO. Would you like to be connected to local lawyers who can better assist you with your case?
What specifically about what I've described strengthens the case, and how does it do so?
Case Rating: *
The specifics that strengthen your case include:
- Documented Violations: Multiple violations of the restraining order indicate ongoing disregard for the court's orders.
- Lack of Accountability: The other party's failure to take responsibility suggests unchanged circumstances.
- Threatening Behavior: Previous threats and actions could be seen as harassment.
- Questionable Intent: Filing meritless legal actions may demonstrate a pattern of using the court system improperly.
Would you like to be connected to local lawyers who can better assist you with your case?
The specifics that strengthen your case include:
- Documented Violations: Multiple violations of the restraining order indicate ongoing disregard for the court's orders.
- Lack of Accountability: The other party's failure to take responsibility suggests unchanged circumstances.
- Threatening Behavior: Previous threats and actions could be seen as harassment.
- Questionable Intent: Filing meritless legal actions may demonstrate a pattern of using the court system improperly.
Would you like to be connected to local lawyers who can better assist you with your case?
Would attorneys ever refuse to represent or work with somebody if the person they're filing a case against is the daughter-in-law of the CEO of the court the case is in?
Case Rating: *
Attorneys might refuse a case if representing the client creates a conflict of interest, especially due to personal or professional relationships. However, each attorney's decision depends on ethical guidelines and their assessment of potential conflicts. Would you like more information on how attorneys evaluate conflicts of interest?
Attorneys might refuse a case if representing the client creates a conflict of interest, especially due to personal or professional relationships. However, each attorney's decision depends on ethical guidelines and their assessment of potential conflicts. Would you like more information on how attorneys evaluate conflicts of interest?
Would attorneys consider themselves to have a professional working relationship with the CEO of the courts if they work at an independent firm?
Case Rating: *
Attorneys working at an independent firm generally do not have a professional working relationship with the CEO of the courts, as their relationship is typically with their clients and the legal system. However, they must adhere to ethical guidelines to avoid any potential conflicts of interest.
Attorneys working at an independent firm generally do not have a professional working relationship with the CEO of the courts, as their relationship is typically with their clients and the legal system. However, they must adhere to ethical guidelines to avoid any potential conflicts of interest.
Do attorneys keep any sort of "blacklist" for clients that have lied to them or the judge?
Case Rating: *
Attorneys typically do not maintain a formal "blacklist" for clients who have lied. However, if a client is known to be dishonest, attorneys may choose not to work with them in the future due to trust and ethical considerations.
Attorneys typically do not maintain a formal "blacklist" for clients who have lied. However, if a client is known to be dishonest, attorneys may choose not to work with them in the future due to trust and ethical considerations.
Would attorneys ever inform each other of bad-faith clients they have had in the past, so as to protect each other's reputation?
Case Rating: *
Attorneys generally maintain client confidentiality and are bound by ethical obligations not to disclose information about clients, including their conduct, to others. However, within the legal community, informal discussions may occur to some extent, especially if a client's behavior is widely known. Would you like to know more about attorney-client confidentiality or any related topic?
Attorneys generally maintain client confidentiality and are bound by ethical obligations not to disclose information about clients, including their conduct, to others. However, within the legal community, informal discussions may occur to some extent, especially if a client's behavior is widely known. Would you like to know more about attorney-client confidentiality or any related topic?
Start a new chat