Zech

Zech v. Richards CA4/3

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMarch 8, 2022G057798California10,810 words

Opinion

Opinion

FACTS

I. Retainer Agreement

In June 2016, Richards retained Zech to represent her in a pending marital dissolution action. She executed a retainer agreement (Agreement) stating Zech’s services would cost $400 per hour. However, the Agreement specified Richards did not have to pay an initial retainer fee. Instead, she was required to execute a family law attorney real property lien as security for Zech’s fees. Zech claimed he agreed to this arrangement because Richards’s stepfather was a friend who asked him for a favor. Richards’s stepfather told Zech that Richards was unsatisfied with her current family law attorney and she did not have money for a retainer, but she owned a house having substantial equity in Newport Beach. Richards signed the lien in August 2016.

II. Marital Dissolution Judgment & Postjudgment Appeals

On June 16, 2017, the trial court entered a stipulated judgment in the marital dissolution action. Circumstances surrounding the parties’ stipulation agreement and the judgment are described in greater detail in our opinions addressing Richards’s numerous appeals arising from her postjudgment legal machinations, delaying execution of the judgment for over three…

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.