Faton

Bashar Ahmedo appeals from an order requiring him to pay attorney fees incurred by Sina Faton to obtain a domestic violence restraining order against him. He asserts the fee award was improper because the fees were not requested in a timely or proper manner and they were unsupported by the evidence. We reject these contentions and affirm.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

As we shall detail below, Ahmedo and Faton initially represented themselves in the proceedings before the trial court, which solely concerned the issue of a domestic violence restraining order (DVRO). The trial court granted a DVRO against Ahmedo; Ahmedo subsequently obtained counsel and filed a motion for reconsideration, and after reconsidering the matter the court reissued the DVRO against Ahmedo. Faton — who retained counsel when Ahmedo filed his reconsideration motion — thereafter filed a motion for attorney fees under Family Code section 6344, which was granted by the trial court.

On appeal, Ahmedo challenges the attorney fees order. Faton has not filed a respondent’s brief. The record on appeal does not include all of the relevant court orders and hearing transcripts, but the pertinent factual…