Marriage of Vallenthine CA3

DISCUSSION

Husband first contends the trial court wrongly considered his separate property income in ordering him to pay spousal support. A trial court may consider husband’s separate property as a source of income in awarding spousal support. (Fam. Code, § 4320 [“[i]n ordering spousal support . . . , the court shall consider . . . . [¶] (e) [t]he obligations and assets, including the separate property, of each party].) There was no error. Husband’s claim that his trial counsel was negligent and/or committed fraud upon husband is not properly before this court. Husband misunderstands the role of this court. We do not consider such claims in the first instance; we review a trial court’s ruling on claims that an attorney committed negligence or fraud in the representation of his or her client. Husband also asks this court to consider new evidence and award him the $20,000 he invested in wife’s separate property real estate in Peru. Again, husband misunderstands the role of this court. We do not consider evidence in the first instance; we review the evidence previously considered by the trial court.

The record on appeal includes numerous documents and court orders issued…