Marriage of Volovik and Parchin CA2/5
The notices of appeal filed by appellant Pavel Parchin (Parchin), as further limited by the issues properly raised in his appellate briefing, define the scope of our review in this case. Parchin appeals from (1) a January 24, 2017, order that required him to pay $30,000 in sanctions to respondent Anastasiya Volovik’s (Volovik’s) attorneys and denied his motion to compel Volovik to pay him spousal support (the First Order); and (2) a March 28, 2017, order denying Volovik’s motion to enter a default judgment nunc pro tunc (the Second Order). Parchin presents no cognizable argument challenging the Second Order, so we consider only his arguments concerning the First, i.e., whether the record shows the family law court’s attorney fees and costs sanction was an abuse of its discretion and whether the court properly denied Parchin’s spousal support request.
Comments on Marriage of Volovik and Parchin CA2/5