Parker

Parker v. Harbert

Good Law
151 Cal. Rptr. 3d 642·2012 Cal. App. LEXIS 1330·212 Cal. App. 4th 1172
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaDecember 19, 2012No. A134060California2,635 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Jones, J.

Lee D. Harbert appeals from a judgment ordering him to pay $92,000 in attorney fees and costs as sanctions pursuant to Family Code section 271. 1 He contends (1) the court’s “finding of objective unreasonableness constitutes prejudicial error”; (2) insufficient evidence supports the award of sanctions; and (3) the application of section 271 violates his federal and state constitutional rights.

We affirm.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

Harbert and Cynthia M. Parker have been litigating child custody and child support issues in this case for over a decade. As relevant here, the court issued two orders concerning child custody and child support: the first in March 2000 and a second in November 2007. In 2007, Parker had physical custody of Harbert and Parker’s minor son while Harbert was in state prison.

In September 2009, Harbert initiated contempt proceedings against Parker. He claimed Parker willfully violated both court orders by, among other things (1) refusing to bring his minor son to visit him while he was in prison; (2) refusing to give him access to their son’s medical records; and (3) failing to help their son take “the full course of medication for his…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.