Pearson

Pearson v. Pearson (In re Pearson)

Good Law
21 Cal. App. 5th 218·229 Cal. Rptr. 3d 916
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMarch 12, 2018D070360California6,230 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Dato, J.

*221 In August 2009, Tonya and Donald Pearson dissolved their marriage and entered into a Marital Settlement Agreement (MSA) in which they agreed to the division of their marital assets and that Donald would provide ongoing spousal support to Tonya. Despite this purported agreement, the parties engaged in extensive litigation, primarily initiated by Tonya, over the course of the next six years. Tonya now appeals from a postjudgment order of the superior court deciding various requests for orders to modify spousal support, adjudicate omitted assets, and award sanctions or attorney's fees.

Tonya asserts the court erred in its decision by: (1) concluding the term "bonus" in the MSA did not include certain restricted stock and relocation monies; (2) placing a cap on the amount of Donald's future bonuses available for support; (3) determining that she had the ability to work; (4) awarding Donald attorney's fees in the form of sanctions pursuant to Family Code section 271 1 ; and (5) denying her request for additional needs-based attorney's fees pursuant to section 2030. With respect to most of these rulings, we conclude the court did not err. With respect to the orders modifying…

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.