Legal Opinion

In Re Marriage of O'Connor

California Court of Appeal

Decided December 2, 1997No. B101412PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

MASTERSON, J.

With over $3 million in attorney’s fees and costs already incurred in this acrimonious dissolution matter, husband has $2 million in assets remaining and wife has at least $40 million. Husband was awarded $250,000 in pendente lite attorney’s fees and costs early in the proceedings and was later awarded an additional $450,000 pendente lite. Wife asks this court to set the latter award aside, contending that since husband had the $450,000 available from his own assets, he failed to make a threshold showing of need for the award. We reject wife’s definition of “need,” finding…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Droeger v. Friedman, Sloan & RossCalifornia Supreme Court · 1991
  2. In Re Marriage of SullivanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1984
  3. In Re Marriage of StephensonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1984
  4. In Re Marriage of HatchCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1985

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Cheriton v. FraserCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2001
  2. In Re Marriage of DuncanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2001
  3. Ciprari v. Ciprari (In re Ciprari), California Court of Appeal, 5th District2019
  4. Sorge v. SorgeCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2012
  5. Marriage of Cappello CA2/6California Court of Appeal · 2014

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API