Buchanan v. Alhino CA3

Filed 6/17/14 Buchanan v. Alhino CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT (Plumas) ----

JAMIE A. BUCHANAN, C072653

Plaintiff and Appellant, (Super. Ct. No. FL0626643)

v.

ANTHONY G. ALHINO,

Defendant and Respondent.

Jamie A. Buchanan (mother) appeals from a postjudgment order requiring her to contribute $4,000 toward Anthony G. Alhino’s (father) attorney fees. Mother claims the trial court abused its discretion in making its order, because: 1) father failed to file the required forms; 2) her new husband’s income should not have been a factor in the court’s determination of the parties’ relative abilities to pay attorney fees; and 3) the 60-day payment order was unsupported and inappropriate. Disagreeing, we shall affirm.

1

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND On February 27, 2012, father filed an order to show cause (Judicial Council form FL-300)1 asking the court for orders regarding child support, child custody, and attorney fees. Father supported his requests with an attached application for order and supporting declaration (form FL-310). On March 29, 2012, father filed a current income and expense declaration (form FL-150). On August 21, 2012, the parties appeared before the trial court. The court acknowledged it had not yet ruled on father’s request for attorney fees, and indicated it would allow the parties to argue and then take the matter under submission. Mother’s counsel objected that father had failed to file the mandatory forms “FL 158” and “FL 319.” The court noted the forms father had filed were “comparable” to those forms, as permitted under the Rules of Court, and sufficient to put the issue before the court. The court nevertheless instructed mother and father to file current income and expense declarations and any forms, pleadings, or authorities that they wanted the court to consider in support of and in opposition to father’s request for fees. The court gave the parties until September 10, 2012, to complete the filings and it would then take the matter under submission. Prior to the August 21 hearing, father’s counsel had filed a cost memorandum in support of father’s request for attorney fees, wherein counsel indicated father owed him $14,720 in fees. On August 24, 2012, counsel filed a supplemental cost memorandum that included counsel’s declaration attesting to the fees listed. That same day, father filed a current income and expense declaration, in which he declared his monthly income to be $2,166.40 each month ($76.40 from disability, $798 from social security, and $646 in public aid for each of his two children). Father also estimated his monthly expenses to be