Marriage of Davis CA2/6

Filed 3/18/25 Marriage of Davis CA2/6 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION SIX

In re Marriage of ALVIANNA 2d Civ. No. B339033 and WILLIAM OSCAR DAVIS, (Super. Ct. No. D401336) JR. (Ventura County)

ALVIANNA DAVIS,

Appellant,

v.

WILLIAM OSCAR DAVIS, JR.,

Respondent.

Alvianna Davis appeals from an order awarding her spousal support, directing the sale of the home she previously shared with William Oscar Davis, Jr., and dividing the community interest in his pension and retirement accounts.

Alvianna1 contends the trial court: (1) applied the wrong standards for determining spousal support, (2) miscalculated the value of marital property, and (3) undervalued William’s pension and retirement accounts. We affirm. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY Alvianna and William married in 1999. In 2006, William’s employer transferred him from Texas to California. Alvianna gave up her 18-year career to move with William and their two young children. She has worked a series of temporary and retail jobs ever since. Alvianna filed for divorce in 2020. The trial court granted her temporary spousal support of $2,810 per month, which she used to pay the mortgage on the family home that remained in William’s name. In 2024, the trial court reduced spousal support to $1,200 per month. It ordered the sale of the family home and directed the proceeds to be split equally between Alvianna and William. It also ordered an equal division of the community interest in William’s pension and retirement accounts. DISCUSSION Spousal support A trial court has broad discretion to award spousal support. (In re Marriage of Blazer (2009) 176 Cal.App.4th 1438, 1442- 1443.) When doing so, the court must consider various factors, including the parties’ earning capacities (Fam. Code,2 § 4320, subd. (a)), contributions to education and training (id., subd. (b)),