Marriage of Mihoubi and Djebari CA1/1

Filed 12/23/25 Marriage of Mihoubi and Djebari CA1/1 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION ONE

In re the Marriage of DJAMEL MIHOUBI and MARIEM DJEBARI.

DJAMEL MIHOUBI, A167123

Appellant, (Contra Costa County v. Super. Ct. No. MSD21-02162 MARIEM DJEBARI, Respondent.

Appellant Djamel Mihoubi challenges trial court orders requiring him to pay child support, denying his request to modify the amount of support, and imposing $1,500 in sanctions under Family Code1 section 271. We affirm. I. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

In June 2021, after his then-wife, respondent Mariem Djebari, obtained a domestic violence restraining order (DVRO) against him, Mihoubi petitioned to dissolve the parties’ marriage. The following month, Djebari

1 All further statutory references are to the Family Code.

sought custody of the parties’ five-year-old child and requested child and spousal support. The parties filed income and expense statements, and the matter was heard over two days, concluding on April 1, 2022. We refer to this hearing, as do the parties, as the April 1 hearing. There was no court reporter at the April 1 hearing, and consequently there is no transcript of it in our appellate record. The hearing’s minutes, however, are detailed, and they describe the trial court’s oral pronouncements, which granted much of the relief Djebari sought. The parties were asked to prepare a draft written order, but ultimately they could not agree upon one. On April 28, 2022, Mihoubi filed a request to change the trial court’s rulings regarding his child support obligations, even though the written order had not been finalized. He stated, “I am not earning enough to pay the ordered child . . . support because I lost my job in January 2022 when I was terminated as a consequence of [the] DVRO. I am requesting that child support be modified per guideline based on actual earnings.” The trial court filed its written order regarding the April 1 hearing on August 22, 2022. In it, Mihoubi was ordered to pay arrearages for two periods, August 1 to December 31, 2021, and January 1 to March 31, 2022. He was also ordered, starting April 1, to pay $942 per month for child support.2 These amounts were calculated using DissoMaster, in which Mihoubi’s income was set at $12,000 per month for the arrearages periods and $10,000 per month for the obligations starting April 1. Two days after the written order was filed, a hearing was held to resolve Mihoubi’s April 28 request to change his child support obligations. A