In Re Marriage of Hatch
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
KING, J.
In this case we hold it is an abuse of discretion for trial courts to deny motions for pendente lite attorney fees and costs in marital dissolution proceedings without considering the needs of the requesting spouse and the ability to pay of the spouse against whom the award is sought. 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…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- In Re Marriage of LopezCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1974
- In Re Marriage of MorrisonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1978
- In Re Marriage of JafemanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1972
- In Re Marriage of PopenhagerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1979
- In Re Marriage of BrantnerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1977
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Cheriton v. FraserCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2001
- Droeger v. Friedman, Sloan & RossCalifornia Supreme Court · 1991
- In Re Marriage of KeechCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1999
- In Re the Marriage of NortonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1988
- In Re Marriage of O'ConnorCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1997
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.