Request for Order: Spousal Support, Attorney Fees and Costs, Vocational Training
1 SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA 2 COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 3 UNIFIED FAMILY COURT 4
5) 6 CHEE THAO-YANG,) Case Number: FDI-26-802773) 7 Petitioner) Hearing Date: July 21, 2026) 8 VS.) Hearing Time: 9:00 AM) 9 LY YANG,) Department: 404) 10 Respondent) Presiding: AI MORI) 11) 12 REQUEST FOR ORDER: SPOUSAL OR PARTNER SUPPORT, ATTORNEY FEES AND COSTS, 13 VOCATIONAL TRAINING COSTS 14 TENTATIVE RULING 15 Having read and considered the pleadings, declarations, and other evidence submitted in this matter, the 16 Court makes the following findings and orders: 17 A. Procedural History 18 1) Petitioner Chee Thao-Yang (Mother) and Respondent Ly Yang (Father) married on 12/19/2008 19 and separated on 12/21/2025, for a marriage of 17 years.
The parties have two minor children, 20 Martin (DOB: 9/9/2012, age 13) and Ailee (DOB: 1/19/2017, age 9). Mother is represented by 21 attorney Kasey Dunton. Father is currently self-represented. 22 2) On 2/11/2026, in related Case No. FDV-26-818908, Judge Luna denied Mother’s Request for 23 Domestic Violence Restraining Order against Father and ordered the parties to share joint legal 24 and joint physical custody of their children. Judge Luna ordered Father to have 7 days of 25 visitation with the children in California with 21 days’ notice to Mother. 26 3) Now on for hearing is Father’s Request for Order filed 5/18/2026 seeking: temporary guideline 27 spousal support, $50,000 in attorney’s fees and costs, an advance of community property RSUs in 28 the amount of $70,000 to fund Father’s vocational evaluation as a commercial pilot, and a stay on 29 any seek-work order or imputation order until he can complete that training.
Father states that he
1 vacated the parties’ shared apartment because Mother told him he had to either pay the rent or 2 vacate the apartment. Father states he was unable to pay the rent and so vacated the apartment 3 even though he had nowhere else to go. Father states that Mother subsequently cut him off 4 financially. Father states that he lived at his workplace and then in his car, and then relocated to 5 Minnesota where family members are currently housing him and helping him pay for food. Father 6 states that prior to his relocation, he had been employed part-time (30 – 35 hours per week, 7 earning $22 per hour) for United Airlines working ground crew since December 2023.
Father 8 states he worked part-time so he could be available for the parties’ children because Mother’s job 9 is time intensive. Father states that he has been diligently applying for work in Minnesota and has 10 been offered a position with Unifi Aviation LLC and will earn $18.16 per hour but Father is 11 unsure of how many hours he will receive. Father states that he would like to enroll full-time in 12 an accelerated professional pilot program, but he would not be able to do that program full time 13 and also working.
Looking for case law or statutes not cited here? Search published authorities
Examples: “Why did the court rule this way?” · “What were the procedural grounds?” · “Is appearance required?”
Father states that Mother is an accounts manager for Amazon with a significant 14 base income, bonuses, and RSUs and the parties’ joint tax return filed in 2024 reflects her making 15 $300,000 that year. 16 4) On 5/18/2026, Father’s prior attorney Andrew Graham filed a declaration wherein he states 17 Father has paid $17,525 in fees to date for work getting up to speed, drafting the instant motion, 18 reviewing pleadings filed by Mother, and conferring with Father. Father’s attorney states, “The 19 litigation is not overtly complex but there are anticipated to be issues surrounding custody and 20 visitation, child and spousal support, and division of property.
There are currently already two 21 motions pending and this follows an unsuccessful request for a DVRO from Petitioner. I therefore 22 reasonably expect some of these matters to require litigation in which case the $50,000 requested 23 is likely to be only a portion of the total fees requested. Given the large disparity in access to 24 funds, Petitioner bearing this portion is reasonable.” 25 5) On 5/28/2026, a Substitution of Attorney was filed wherein Father’s former attorney Andrew 26 Graham substituted out as Father’s attorney of record.
Father is now self-represented. 27 6) On 7/9/2026, Mother filed a Responsive Declaration. Mother asks the Court to order guideline 28 spousal and child support and impute income to Father, order Father to seek work, issue a Gavron 29 warning against Father, and deny Father’s other requests for order. Mother states Father
1 voluntarily quit his job and relocated to Minnesota. Mother states that Father’s request to fund 2 flight school is out of touch with reality. Mother states Father's request to fund flight school is 3 unrealistic because he has contemplated becoming a pilot for years, the program would require 4 additional years of flight training before he could become employable as a commercial pilot, and 5 the community RSUs are worth approximately $50,000 rather than the $70,000 Father seeks. 6 Regarding Father’s request for attorney’s fees, Mother states she does not have superior access to 7 assets from which to pay attorney’s fees.
She has paid her fees using a personal loan and there is 8 no premarital separate property. Mother also states that since the parties separated, she has had to 9 pay all of the children’s expense as well as community debts. 10 7) On 7/9/2026, Wife filed an Income and Expense Declaration. Wife states that she works 40 hours 11 per week as a Technical Account Manager for Amazon and earns $15,492 per month. 12 8) On 7/14/2026, Husband filed a Reply Declaration. Husband argues he did not voluntarily reduce 13 his income but was forced to relocate due to Wife's alleged threats of legal action.
Husband states 14 he has obtained employment and developed what Husband states is a cost-effective plan to 15 become a commercial pilot. Husband also accuses Wife of misconduct, including violating the 16 Standard Family Law Restraining Orders, which Husband states warrants an award of attorney's 17 fees and Family Code section 271 sanctions. 18 9) On 7/14/2026, Husband filed an Income and Expense Declaration. Husband states he began a 19 position as a ramp agent in Minnesota on 6/11/2026. Husband states he earns $18.16 per hour and 20 works 32 hours per week. 21 B.
Findings and Order 22 1) Mother’s request to impute income to Father what he was previously earning ($2,860 per month) 23 is hereby granted. 24 2) The Court finds good cause to issue a support order effective 8/1/2026 as the Court finds Mother 25 was paying rent for two apartments (both the marital apartment and her new apartment) between 26 February 2026 and July 2026 and did not have the ability to pay for support during that period. 27 3) Effective 8/1/2026, in accordance with the XSpouse calculation attached hereto and incorporated 28 herein, Mother shall pay Father temporary guideline spousal support of $2,137 per month and 29 Father shall pay Mother guideline child support of $741 per month, for a net payment from
1 Mother to Father of $1,396 per month. One-half shall be due and payable by the 1st and one-half 2 shall be due and payable by the 15th of each month. 3 4) The Court notes that the attached XSpouse calculation is based on a 100% timeshare for Mother, 4 which both parties listed is the current timeshare in their Income and Expense Declarations. 5 5) Father’s request for an advance of community property RSUs to fund Father’s vocational 6 evaluation as a commercial pilot is denied. 7 6) Because Father is currently working, Father’s request for a stay on any seek-work order or 8 imputation order until he can complete that training is denied. 9 7) Father’s request for need-based attorney’s fees and costs is denied without prejudice to a new 10 Request for Order.
Father’s attorney has substituted out of the case and it is unclear from Father’s 11 Reply Declaration whether he is still making that request. Moreover, Father’s attorney’s 12 declaration filed 5/18/2026 did not provide sufficient detail for the Court to make a determination 13 regarding whether the fees requested are just, reasonable, and necessary. If Father files a new 14 Request for Order seeking need-based attorney’s fees, Father must explain in detail what tasks his 15 attorneys have performed to date as well as what tasks are left to be completed to bring this case 16 to completion. 17 8) Mother’s unopposed request for a Gavron warning against Father is granted.
The Court advises 18 Father, pursuant to Family Code section 4330(b), that he is expected to make reasonable good- 19 faith efforts to become self-supporting within a reasonable period of time. Failure to make 20 reasonable efforts toward becoming self-supporting may constitute a change of circumstances 21 warranting modification or termination of spousal support. 22 9) Mother’s attorney shall prepare the Findings and Order After Hearing. 23 10) Preparation of Order: If you are directed by the court to prepare the order after hearing – within 24 10 calendar days of the hearing you must either: (a) Serve the proposed order to the other 25 party/counsel for approval, and follow the procedures set forth in CA Rules of Court, Rule 26 5.125(c), or (b) If the other party did not appear or the matter was uncontested, submit the 27 proposed order after hearing directly to the court.
Failure to submit the order after hearing within 28 10 days may allow the other party to prepare a proposed order and submit it to the court in 29 accordance with CA Rules of Court, Rule 5.125(d).
thao-yang v. yang xspouse.xsp Xspouse 2026-1-CA
Fixed Shares Father Mother Monthly figures Cash Flow #of children 0 2 2026 Guideline Proposed % time with NCP 0.00 % 0.00 % Comb. net spendable 12989 12989 Filing status SINGLE HH/MLA GUIDELINE Percent change 0% 0% # exemptions 1 * 3 * Nets(adjusted) Father Wages+salary 2860 15492 Father 2150 Payment cost/benefit 1396 1396 Self-employed income 0 0 Mother 10839 Net spendable income 3546 3546 Other taxable income 0 0 Total 12989 Change from guideline 0 0 TANF+CS received 0 0 Support Other nontaxble income 0 0 Addons % of combined spendable 27% 27% 0 New spouse income 0 0 Guideln CS % of saving over guideline 0% 0% -741 401(k) employee contrib 0 0 Total taxes 356 356 S.Clara SS 2137 Adjustments to income 0 0 Dep. exemption value 0 0 Total 1396 SS paid prev marriage 0 0 # withholding allowances 0 0 CS range: -544--741 CS paid prev marriage 0 0 Net wage paycheck 2042 2042 Health insurance 354 679 Mother Other medical expense 0 0 Payment cost/benefit -1396 -1396 Property tax expense 0 0 Net spendable income 9443 9443 Ded interest expense 0 0 Proposed Change from guideline 0 0 Charitable contributions 0 0 Tactic 9 % of combined spendable 73% 73% Misc tax deductions 0 0 CS -741 Qual bus income ded 0 0 SS % of saving over guideline 0% 0% 2137 Required union dues 0 0 Total Total taxes 3974 3974 1396 Mandatory retirement 0 0 Dep. exemption value 0 0 Hardship deduction 0 * 0 * Saving 0 # withholding allowances 0 0 Other GDL deductions 0 0 Releases 0 Net wage paycheck 10105 10105 Child care expenses 0 0
Father pays Guideline CS, Proposed CS Mother pays Guideline SS, Proposed SS
FC 4055 checking: ON Per Child Information Timeshare cce(F) cce(M) Addons Payor Basic CS Payor Pres CS Payor All children 0 - 100 0 0 0 Father 741 Father 741 Father
Martin 0 - 100 0 0 0 Father 274 Father 274 Father Ailee 0 - 100 0 0 0 Father 467 Father 467 Father
Time: 03:57:21 Superior Court of California Date: 07/20/26 County of San Francisco