Turns v. Turns CA1/1

Filed 3/12/26 Turns v. Turns CA1/1 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

SEAN LIEF TURNS, Plaintiff and Appellant, A172695 v. (City & County of San Francisco HIKMET MELIS TURNS, Super. Ct. No. FDI-24-799222) Defendant and Respondent.

In this dissolution, the trial court ordered Sean Lief Turns to pay attorney’s fees to Hikmet Melis Turns.1 On appeal, Sean contends the court abused its discretion, made unsupported findings, and violated his due process. We affirm. BACKGROUND The parties married in 2017, had a child in 2022, and Sean filed a petition for dissolution in February 2024. Hikmet asked the trial court to issue orders concerning custody and visitation, child and spousal support, and attorney’s fees. She averred she was unemployed, financially reliant on Sean, and left unable to access joint accounts, while he “earn[ed] a significant

1 We recite only those facts and procedural history necessary to resolve

the limited issues before us. (People v. Garcia (2002) 97 Cal.App.4th 847, 851.) For clarity, we use the parties’ first names, intending no disrespect. Unless otherwise indicated, all dates refer to 2024. 1

income.” Sean opposed the fee request, explaining he had no money left over after paying “ ‘all expenses including huge community debt.’ ” His income and expense declaration indicated he was employed as a PG&E line worker, with $15,407 in average gross monthly income and $22,000 in average monthly overtime income. But he also reported $30,855 in average monthly expenses, including installment payments on more than $450,000 of debt. Hikmet’s income and expense declaration indicated she was unemployed, with no income. She reported monthly expenses of $7,225—towards which her father was contributing—and a loan from family for attorney’s fees.2 The parties also submitted lengthy declarations and other evidence concerning their financial resources and needs. In September, after considering pleadings, declarations, and other evidence, the trial court issued temporary orders regarding custody and visitation, child support, and spousal support. It found Sean “earned over $317,000 through August of this year,” he contributed an average of $1,029 into his 401(k) each month, and Hikmet had no income at that time. The court continued her request for attorney’s fees to November 26, ordering Sean to file a copy of his 401(k) account balance and Hikmet’s attorney to file a declaration of counsel. On November 21, Hikmet’s counsel filed a declaration. It averred— citing attached exhibits—that there was an income disparity, noting Sean had approximately $90,000 in his 401(k), had purchased an $11,000 engagement ring for his fiancée, and was giving his fiancée $2,000 per month. It also noted his 2023 W2 reflected earnings of $658,728. On November 25—