Cases

  • Sandford, et al. v. Sandford, et. al. (2026 Cal.App.LEXIS 537)

    Sandford, et al. v. Sandford, et. al. (2026 Cal.App.LEXIS 537) The court of appeal agreed with our arguments.

  • Lino B. v. Jeanne B. (B338128)

    Lino B. v. Jeanne B. (B338128) The court of appeal agreed with our arguments.

  • In re Marriage of M.D.N. & A.D.N. (A171022)

    In re Marriage of M.D.N. & A.D.N. (A171022) Representing the respondent, the court of appeal agreed with our arguments.

  • Gagliano v. Gutierrez (B332387)

    Gagliano v. Gutierrez (B332387) We successfully represented the respondent in a custody appeal.

  • Armstrong v. Gordon (C097489)

    Armstrong v. Gordon (C097489) The court of appeal agreed with our arguments, reducing “lost profits” damages by $170,000.

  • In re Marriage of Goldman (2025)

    In In re Marriage of Goldman (2025) 107 Cal.App.5th 1258, the Court ruled that, although the defense of “laches” was available in family law cases to enforce marital settlement agreements.

  • Tanguay v. Lavallee (G063471)

    Tanguay v. Lavallee (G063471) We successfully represented the respondent in this appeal pertaining to real property and defaults.

  • Marriage of Sayaye (B331257)

    Marriage of Sayaye (B331257) In an appeal dealing with the interpretation of Family Code section 4007

  • In re Marriage of Levy (G057288)

    The Court of Appeal agreed with our arguments concerning the Uniform Interstate Family Support Act.

1 / 21