By -

                                      Appeals Stemming From Bifurcated Issues

            In family law proceedings, parties have the option of bifurcating pivotal issues for an early trial.  Said trial would occur before all of the other remaining issues (i.e. custody, support, visitation) are decided.  Bifurcated trials are similar to regular trials except for at least one major difference.  Property rulings made during a bifurcated trial are NOT automatically appealable.  Thus, if you are unhappy with the trial court's decision, one must generally wait until the remainder of the case is tried before appealing the issue.  Sometimes this can be a very costly and inefficient.  Fortunately, statutory authority provides an exception to this rule.  

           Courts have the discretion and authority to certify a bifurcated ruling for early appeal.   Family Code Section 2025 provides, “[I]f the court has ordered an issue or issues bifurcated for separate trial or hearing in advance of the disposition of the entire case, a court of appeal may order an issue or issues transferred to it for hearing and decision when the court that heard the issue or issues certifies that the appeal is appropriate. Certification by the court shall be in accordance with rules promulgated by the Judicial Council.”  The judicial council outlines its requirements in the California Rules of Court, Rule 5.392. 

Rule 5.392 provides four different factors a court must consider when deciding whether or not to certify a ruling for an early appeal.  Per Rule 5.392, the factors include (a) whether the issue is pivotal to the case, (b) expenditure of judicial resources (c) the benefit to the parties (d) and whether resolution of the issue would lead to settlement.  An analysis of your facts in light of the above factors will help a court determine whether or not to certify a decision for early appeal.

When is it smart to engage in an early? The answer is when said appeal saves you time and money.  Occasionally, bifurcated decisions can have a significant trickledown effect to the remaining issues in the case.  For example, a decision regarding transmutation can trigger a potential violation of fiduciary duty.  If your client is hell bent on appealing it would make little sense to engage in a full blown trial on a violation of fiduciary duty while the issue of transmutation has yet to be decided by the Court of Appeals.    Bottom line, anytime you engage in an early (bifurcated) trial make sure you consult with an experienced family law attorney.  An experienced family law attorney must analyze the facts of your case and the potential trickledown effect of a bifurcated ruling.  Such an analysis will help narrow the issues, focus your attention and potentially save you time and money.

 Sincerely, 

Patrick Baghdaserians, CFLS
Family Law Attorney and Expert Located in Pasadena, CA


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

California Statutory Criteria For Determination of Custody Disputes

By -
Family Code § 3022 provides the court with authority to make an order for the custody of a minor child that seems necessary and proper during the pendency of a proceeding or at any time thereafter.    California family law courts use Family Code § 3040 to establish the order of preference in granting custody in divorce actions.  The first section of this code section provides that “Custody should be granted in the following order of preference according to the best interest of the child as provided in Sections 3011 and 3020.” Parties involved in a custody dispute would be wise to review Family Code §§ 3011 and 3020.  Since these two sections outline the criteria that California judges use to determine custody disputes, parties to such actions should address these factors in their declarations when providing testimony and argument.  Successful litigants spend time addressing facts that directly address these factors.  Spending too much time on fact...
Read more
By -
Image
BEYOND GUIDELINE CHILD SUPPORT           For nearly 100 years, California courts have consistently maintained and fostered the  principle  that the duty of a parent does not end by providing mere necessities of life if he is able to afford more.  Bailey vs. Superior Court (1932) 215 Cal.548, 555. On countless occasions courts have explicitly established that the child has a  right “to be supported in a  style and condition that is consonant with the  position in society of its parents .”  Kyne vs. Kyne (1945) 70 Cal.App. 2d 80, 83.          The California  Family Code  provides specific code provisions in regards the   establishment of child support orders in the state by trial courts.  Said code sections demonstrate a very clear intent and objective of the legislature to ensure fair and  appropriate child support orders are rendered for children with parents from...
Read more
By -
Image
         Paying too much in Spousal Support? Call us! Modification of a spousal support order is a matter for the exercise of the court’s discretion, based upon a showing of a change of circumstances since the last spousal support order.  In re Marriage of Meegan  (1992) 11 Cal. App. 4 th 156, 161;   In re Marriage of Stephenson (1995) 39 Cal. App. 4 th 71, 76-77. “In determining whether a change of circumstances has occurred, the trial court is required to reconsider the same standards and criteria set forth in . . . now Family Code section 4320 it considered in making the initial long-term order at the time of judgement and any subsequent modification order.”   Marriage of Stephenson (1995) 39 Cal. App. 4 th 71, 77. In other words, in considering a spousal support modification request - … given the predicate of a change of circumstances – the trial court looks at the various factors bearing on spousa...
Read more