______________________________________________________________________________________________________

01-Domestic violence and child custody

​​

In re Marriage of Jessica and Sammer Z.

(2026) 123 Cal.App.5th 1

​

Dennis Temko represented a mother who successfully challenged a custody order entered without applying California’s domestic violence presumption. The Court of Appeal held that a finding rebutting the presumption in a separate case involving another child and another parent did not bind her. The court reversed the custody and visitation orders and required the trial court to apply section 3044 and make the necessary findings before entering a new custody order.

​

​

My Role:               Counsel for appellant mother.

​

Result:                  Prevailed - Custody and visitation orders reversed; remand for application of Family Code section                                    3044.

​

Why it matters:  Section 3044 is child specific; overcoming the presumption as to a different child does not negate                                   a court from having to apply 3044 when a different child is involved.

​

____________________________________________________________________________________________​

02-California Supreme Court • Access to appellate review

​​

Family Violence Appellate Project v. Superior Court

(2026) 20 Cal.5th 564

​​

Dennis Temko served as co-counsel for family law organizations appearing as amici curiae in a California Supreme Court case addressing access to court records. The Supreme Court held that indigent civil litigants must have meaningful access, upon request, to an official verbatim record, including electronic recording when an official court reporter is unavailable. The decision addresses a critical barrier to appellate review in custody, support, domestic violence, and other civil proceedings.

​

My Role:                Co-counsel for amici curiae supporting petitioners: Association of Certified Family Law                                                       Specialists,  American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers Southern California Chapter, and San                                          Diego Family Law Bar Association.

​

Result:                    Prevailed - Supreme Court granted mandate requiring respondent courts to provide qualifying                                          litigant meaningful access to an official verbatim record.

​​

Why it matters:    An adequate record allows appellate courts to review claimed trial court errors.

____________________________________________________________________________________________​

03 - Grandparent visitation • Constitutional parenting rights

​​

Balandran v. Balandran

(2025) 113 Cal.App.5th 858

Dennis Temko obtained reversal of a grandparent-visitation order that infringed a fit mother’s constitutional parenting rights. After her husband’s death, the mother continued allowing the children to visit their paternal grandparents but opposed a court-imposed schedule. The Court of Appeal held that the order failed to respect the presumption favoring her parenting decisions and directed the trial court to deny the grandparents’ petition.

​

My role:                   Counsel for appellant mother.

​

Result:                     Prevailed - Reversed with directions to deny the grandparents’ visitation petition. 

​

Why it matters:    Explains constitutional limits on court-ordered third-party visitation when a fit parent                                                         voluntarily permits contact.

​

____________________________________________________________________________________________​

04 · Child custody • Due process • Appellate procedure

​​

In re Marriage of R.K. & G.K.

(2025) 113 Cal.App.5th 14

​​

Dennis Temko successfully defended an order granting a mother sole physical custody against claims that the custody change violated the father’s due process rights and improperly separated the child from siblings. The Court of Appeal affirmed, emphasizing the need to preserve objections in the trial court and provide an adequate appellate record. The decision addresses notice, asserted move-away consequences, and sibling relationships in a contested custody appeal.

​

​

My Role:                  Counsel for respondent mother.

​

Result:                     Prevailed - Affirmed the order granting mother sole physical custody.

​

Why it matters:    No move away occurred.  Mere change in custody and move back.  Also shows how preservation                                         and the appellate record affect challenges to custody changes.

____________________________________________________________________________________________​

05 · Military retirement • Extraordinary writ relief

​​

In re Marriage of Sullivan

(2023) 89 Cal.App.5th 585

​​

Dennis Temko served as co-counsel for a husband who obtained writ relief after the family court declined to divide his former wife’s military pension. The Court of Appeal held that federal law did not require her explicit, pension-specific consent to jurisdiction and that her litigation conduct established consent. Treating the appeal as a writ petition, the court directed division of the pension and further proceedings on the remaining issues.

 

My Role:                  Co-counsel for appellant husband, with Stephen Temko.

​​

Result:                     Prevailed - Peremptory writ directing vacation of the challenged judgment and pension ruling,                                         and an order dividing the military pension.

​​

Why it matters:    Clarifies consent to jurisdiction under the federal military retirement statute and illustrates                                               discretionary conversion of an appeal into a writ proceeding.

____________________________________________________________________________________________​

06 · Dependency • Appellate disentitlement

​​

In re E.E.

(2020) 49 Cal.App.5th 195

​

Dennis Temko represented a mother in a published dependency appeal addressing the evidence required for jurisdiction and removal, along with the limits of appellate disentitlement. The Court of Appeal declined to dismiss her appeal based on noncompliance with court orders and reached the merits. It ultimately affirmed the dependency findings and removal orders.

​

My Role:                 Court-appointed counsel for appellant mother.

​

Result:                     Lost - Dependency jurisdiction and removal orders affirmed; request to dismiss the appeal under                                     disentitlement rejected.

​

Why it matters:    Addresses access to appellate review when a dependency appeal implicates children’s welfare.

 ____________________________________________________________________________________________

07 · Family Code section 271 • Sanctions

​

Menezes v. McDaniel

(2019) 44 Cal.App.5th 340

​

Dennis Temko obtained a partial reversal of a $200,000 sanctions order under Family Code section 271. The Court of Appeal held that sanctions must be tied to attorney fees and costs and remanded for an explanation supporting the award. Although anticipated attorney fees could be included, unrelated losses could not support the sanction.

 

My role:                 Counsel for appellant wife.

​​

Result:                    Prevailed - reversal and remand concerning the basis for a $200,000 sanctions award.

​​

Why it matters:    Defines the required connection between section 271 sanctions and attorney fees and costs.

​____________________________________________________________________________________________

08 · Spousal support modification • Settlement agreements

​

In re Marriage of T.C. & D.C.

(2018) 30 Cal.App.5th 419

 

Dennis Temko obtained reversal of an order reducing his client’s spousal support. Although the supporting spouse’s increased earnings justified reconsidering support, the Court of Appeal held that the resulting modification failed to respect the parties’ reasonable expectations under their dissolution agreement. The decision explains how negotiated support terms constrain a court’s modification discretion.

​

My role:                  Counsel for appellant husband.

​​

Result:                    Prevailed - support-modification order reversed and remanded.

​​

Why it matters:    Connects support modification to the expectations reflected in the parties’ agreement.

​

_______________________________________________________________________

09 · International move-away • Emergency writ relief

​

Lief v. Superior Court

(2018) 30 Cal.App.5th 868

 

Dennis Temko obtained emergency appellate relief preventing a child’s removal to Israel before the statutory stay expired. The Court of Appeal held that the 30-day stay under Code of Civil Procedure section 917.7 began with entry of the move-away judgment, rather than an earlier tentative oral decision. The court issued a writ directing the family court to grant the father’s application enforcing the stay.

​

My role:                  Counsel for petitioner father.

​

Result:                     Prevailed—writ granted directing the family court to enforce the statutory stay.

​

Why it matters:    Preserves the statutory opportunity to seek appellate relief before a child leaves California.

____________________________________________________________________________________________

10 · Personal jurisdiction • Parentage and child support

​​

David L. v. Superior Court

(2018) 29 Cal.App.5th 359

​

Dennis Temko obtained a writ preventing California from exercising personal jurisdiction over a Connecticut resident in a parentage and child support case. The Court of Appeal held that the mother’s California residence and the foreseeable effects of out-of-state conduct did not establish the necessary connection between the father’s own suit-related conduct and California. The court directed the trial court to quash service.

​

My role:                   Counsel for petitioner father.

​

Result:                     Prevailed—writ granted directing the court to quash service of summons.

​

Why it matters:    Applies constitutional minimum-contacts principles to parentage and support litigation.

​____________________________________________________________________________________________

11 · Dependency • Indian Child Welfare Act

​

In re E.H.

(2018) 26 Cal.App.5th 1058

​​

Dennis Temko obtained a limited reversal of a judgment terminating a mother’s parental rights because the agency failed to provide adequate ancestry information to the Tohono O’odham Nation. The Court of Appeal required accurate notice so the tribe could assess the child’s status under the Indian Child Welfare Act. The remand required further ICWA proceedings, with reinstatement of the termination judgment if the child was found not to be an Indian child after proper notice.

​

My role:                  Court-appointed counsel for appellant mother.

​

Result:                     Prevailed - Obtained a  reversal of parental-rights termination for proper ICWA notice.

​

Why it matters:    Enforces meaningful tribal notice before a parental-rights termination becomes final.

____________________________________________________________________________________________

12 · Child support • Stock options • High earners

​

In re Marriage of Macilwaine

(2018) 26 Cal.App.5th 514

​

Dennis Temko served as counsel for the respondent in a published appeal addressing stock options and child support for a high-income parent. The Court of Appeal held that stock-option compensation must enter the support calculation once it is available without legal restrictions on exercise and sale. The decision also explains the findings required to justify support below the guideline amount under the extraordinarily high earner provision.

​​

My role:                  Counsel for respondent father.

​

Result:                    Lost - Reversed and remanded for recalculation of support.

​

Why it matters:    Addresses when equity compensation becomes support income and how courts evaluate                                                      children’s needs.

____________________________________________________________________________________________

13 · Spousal support • Earning capacity • Attorney fees

​

In re Marriage of Pearson

(2018) 21 Cal.App.5th 218

​

Dennis Temko served as counsel for a wife who obtained a partial reversal in postjudgment support litigation. The Court of Appeal required further consideration of her ability to work and the effect that determination should have on spousal support and attorney fees. The published portion also addresses section 271 sanctions and the use of support funds to satisfy a sanctions award.

​

My role:                  Counsel for appellant wife.

​

Result:                    Prevailed —partial reversal for reconsideration of ability to work, support, and fees; otherwise                                          affirmed.

​

Why it matters:    Combines support and fee issues with the statutory limits governing sanctions. The opinion was                                        partially published; the favorable support-related outcome should be distinguished from its                                              published sanctions holdings.

____________________________________________________________________________________________

14 · Bonus support • Settlement interpretation

​​

In re Marriage of Minkin

(2017) 11 Cal.App.5th 939

 

Dennis Temko served as counsel for a husband who successfully defended the trial court’s interpretation of a bonus-based spousal support agreement. The Court of Appeal rejected an attempt to treat all compensation above base salary as an annual bonus, affirming an arrearage determination substantially below the amount sought. It also affirmed the attorney-fee ruling and the denial of the former wife’s request to reinstate monthly support.

​

My role:                  Counsel for respondent husband.

​

Result:                    Prevailed—challenged support and fee rulings affirmed.

​

Why it matters:    Demonstrates why the parties’ actual agreement and circumstances existing at time of                                                         contracting governs the reach of percentage-based bonus support (Ostler-Smith).

____________________________________________________________________________________________

15 · Domestic violence • Self-defense

​

In re Marriage of G.

(2017) 11 Cal.App.5th 773

​

Dennis Temko served as co-counsel in a published appeal examining self-defense under the Domestic Violence Prevention Act. The Court of Appeal held that an injury does not necessarily establish statutory abuse when it results from reasonable force used in self-defense. The court affirmed denial of the requested restraining order based on the trial court’s findings concerning the confrontations.

​

My role:                   Counsel for appellant wife

​

Result:                      Lost - Denial of the requested DVRO affirmed.

​

Why it matters:     Addresses the distinction between actionable abuse and reasonable defensive force.

____________________________________________________________________________________________

16 · Child support • Extraordinary income

​

S.P. v. F.G.

(2016) 4 Cal.App.5th 921

 

Dennis Temko served as co-counsel in a published appeal addressing child support where the supporting parent had extraordinary income and substantial wealth. The Court of Appeal evaluated the child’s needs, the supporting parent’s circumstances, and the reasons required for a below-guideline award. It affirmed an order combining monthly support with direct payment of specified education, health, and extracurricular expenses.

​

My role:                  Counsel for appellant mother

​

Result:                    Below-guideline child support order affirmed.

​

Why it matters:    Examines how the high-earner exception applies to a particular child’s support needs.

____________________________________________________________________________________________

17 · Domestic violence • Commissioner authority

​

Elena S. v. Kroutik

(2016) 247 Cal.App.4th 570

 

Dennis Temko successfully defended a five-year domestic violence restraining order against a challenge to the commissioner’s authority. The Court of Appeal held that the appellant failed to establish the absence of a stipulation and that his participation supported implied consent to the commissioner. The decision also emphasizes an appellant’s responsibility to provide an adequate record.

​

My role:                   Counsel for respondent protected party.  '

​

Result:                     Prevailed—five-year domestic violence restraining order affirmed.

​

Why it matters:    Addresses implied stipulation to a commissioner and the record needed to challenge a                                                          restraining order.

​​​​​

18 · Child custody • Move-away appeal

​

In re Marriage of Winternitz

(2015) 235 Cal.App.4th 644

​

Dennis Temko served as counsel for a father who successfully defended orders denying the mother’s proposed relocation and placing the child primarily in his care. The appeal addressed the custody evaluation, the parents’ willingness to support the child’s relationship with the other parent, and the child’s custodial preference. The Court of Appeal affirmed the challenged orders.

​

My role:                  Co-counsel for respondent father

​

Result:                     Prevailed—denial of relocation, custody change, and fee ruling affirmed.

​

Why it matters:    Demonstrates appellate representation in a contested move-away and custody dispute.

​____________________________________________________________________________________________

19 · Criminal appeal • Claim-of-right defense

​

People v. Anderson

(2015) 235 Cal.App.4th 93

 

This published criminal appeal addressed the limits of the claim-of-right defense when a defendant forcibly seeks to recover property for someone else. The Court of Appeal rejected the defense theory but modified the judgment to stay punishment for the burglary and its firearm enhancement under Penal Code section 654. The judgment was otherwise affirmed.

​

My role:                  Contribution to writing the briefing for Robert E. Boyce.

​

Result:                    Prevailed Judgment modified to stay burglary punishment and its firearm enhancement;                                                      otherwise affirmed.

​

Why it matters:    Addresses the scope of the claim-of-right defense; a separate sentencing issue produced a                                                 modification.

____________________________________________________________________________________________

20 · Premarital agreements • Spousal-support waivers

​

In re Marriage of Howell

(2011) 195 Cal.App.4th 1062

​

This published appeal addressed whether a later statutory amendment could invalidate a spousal-support waiver in an earlier premarital agreement. The Court of Appeal held that the 2002 amendment to Family Code section 1612 did not apply retroactively to the parties’ 1999 agreement. Applying the governing law, it reversed the ruling invalidating the waiver and the resulting spousal-support award.

​

My role:                   Ghost wrote the brief for Leigh Galyon and Stephen Temko

​

Result:                     Prevailed - Reversed invalidation of the support waiver and the support award; otherwise                                                     affirmed.

​

Why it matters:    Addresses retroactivity and enforcement of an older premarital support waiver.

​​