 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
In re Thomas2/13/2003
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS
California Rules of Court, rule 977(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 977(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.
Michael Thomas appeals from an order awarding sanctions against him pursuant to Family Code section 271 (section 271). He contends the trial court abused its discretion in making the award. After review, we affirm the judgment.
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
Thomas (husband) and his former wife, Rene Thomas (wife), had four children together. At the time of the 1997 dissolution of their marriage, Jason was 19 years old; Alana was 16; and twin sons Jonathan and Nicholas (the twins) were 10. The Judgment of Marital Dissolution (the judgment) granted husband and wife joint legal and physical custody of all four children; husband was given primary physical custody of Alana, and wife was given primary physical custody of the twins.
At the time of their divorce, both parties lived in Encino. In March 1998, wife sought an order to show cause (OSC) to allow the twins to be enrolled in school in San Pedro, where she planned to move with her new husband. Shortly before the May hearing on the OSC, wife filed a complaint against husband with the Department of Children and Family Services (the department) regarding an incident, occurring six months before the complaint was filed, wherein husband's housemate, Gary Graves, and Jason allegedly pushed Jonathan and made him cry. The department eventually found the allegations to be unsubstantiated. However, at the hearing on the OSC, which occurred before the department's report was completed, husband stipulated on the advice of counsel to allow the twins to be enrolled in school in San Pedro.
Between December 1998 and June 2000, the parties negotiated the division of the cash proceeds (approximately $11,000) of the two life insurance policies referred to in the judgment. These negotiations are reflected in a series of letters between the parties' counsel. Intertwined in the negotiations for the division of the life insurance proceeds were negotiations regarding payment of premiums to maintain medical insurance for the twins, payments of their uncovered medical expenses, and for the twins' participation in little league baseball. The life insurance issue was finally resolved by a Written Stipulation and Order, executed on August 11, 2000, pursuant to which husband released wife from, among other things, any claims for reimbursement of alleged spousal support overpayments, attorney fees, and un-reimbursed medical premium payments; and wife released husband from any claims for reimbursement for medical expenses and health insurance premiums.
On September 19, husband filed a request for an OSC regarding modifying the prior child custody, visitation, and support orders regarding the twins pursuant to section 3022. The OSC was set for November 8. Husband requested that the children be questioned by a neutral third party.
In a letter dated September 22, wife began attempts to schedule husband's deposition. On October 6, husband offered two possible dates. On or about October 16, wife noticed husband's deposition, including a notice to produce documents, for October 31 and November 1. Husband did not file formal objections to the deposition notice or the notice to produce documents. In a letter dated October 17, however, husband objected to "each and every document request" on relevance grounds. In a letter dated October 19, wife advised that blanke
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 California Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|