The California Court of Appeal recently reversed a trial court's decision to award $39,000 in attorney fees in the case of A.O. and Alina Vologodskaya, impacting how attorney fees are handled in domestic violence restraining order cases. This ruling emphasizes the importance of adhering to strict timelines when requesting attorney fees.

The case began when A.O. filed for divorce from Vologodskaya in August 2023 and sought a restraining order against her. Vologodskaya responded by requesting her own restraining order and spousal support. The trial court scheduled a long hearing for January 2024, where both parties ultimately reached a settlement. They agreed to a one-year restraining order protecting A.O. and did not mention attorney fees during their agreement.

After the court issued its orders, A.O. filed a motion in April 2025 seeking attorney fees under California Family Code section 6344. He argued he was entitled to fees as the prevailing party in the restraining order case. However, Vologodskaya opposed the request, claiming it was untimely according to California Rules of Court, rule 3.1702, which requires fee motions to be filed within the time for filing a notice of appeal.

The court ruled that A.O.'s request for attorney fees was indeed untimely. The court noted that A.O. had waited 14 months after the restraining order was issued to file his request, far exceeding the 180-day limit set by law. The court stated, "Given this timeline, A.O.’s fee request was untimely." This ruling was based on the understanding that the restraining order was a final judgment for the purposes of the attorney fee request.

Judge Rodríguez, along with Judges Tucher and Fujisaki, concurred in the decision. They emphasized that the parties had not reserved the right to request attorney fees in their settlement agreement. The court found that the absence of any mention of fees during the proceedings indicated that the parties did not intend to reserve jurisdiction over them.

The ruling clarifies the application of rule 3.1702, which governs claims for attorney fees in civil cases, including family law matters. The court highlighted that there is no exception for family law cases, reinforcing the need for parties to adhere to procedural rules when seeking attorney fees.

This decision impacts future cases involving domestic violence restraining orders and attorney fees, as it underscores the necessity for timely requests. The ruling serves as a reminder for individuals involved in similar legal disputes to be mindful of procedural deadlines to avoid forfeiting their rights to recover attorney fees.

Moving forward, parties involved in domestic violence cases must be diligent in filing their requests for attorney fees within the specified time frames. The ruling may influence how attorneys advise clients regarding the timing of fee requests in future cases.

As for the possibility of an appeal, A.O. may seek to challenge this ruling, but the court has made it clear that the request for attorney fees was not preserved for appeal. Therefore, it is uncertain if further legal action will be pursued in this matter.