Legal Opinion
Hofer v. Hofer
California Court of Appeal
Decided August 13, 2012No. B228461PublishedCited by 13 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
*456Opinion
GILBERT, P. J.
In this marital dissolution action, the trial court orders the husband to pay the wife’s attorney fees and costs pursuant to Family Code section 2030.1 The husband appeals and contends the evidence of his financial circumstances is insufficient. Perhaps. But here sufficiency of the evidence is beside the point. The husband chose not to disclose evidence of his financial circumstances despite three separate discovery orders and sanctions. This choice “disentitles” the husband to a choice accorded most litigants, the choice to appeal. The appeal is dismissed.
FACTS
John M.…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Sprague v. Equifax, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1985
- MacPherson v. MacPhersonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1939
- Tobin v. CasausCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1954
- Alioto Fish Co., Ltd. v. AliotoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1994
- People v. Puluc-SiqueCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2010
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- Fernandes v. Singh, California Court of Appeal, 5th District2017
- Sass v. Cohen, California Court of Appeal, 5th District2019
- Fernandes v. SinghCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2017
- Jogani v. JoganiCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2026
- M.G. v. M.S. CA3California Court of Appeal · 2016
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.