Isaac Newton instructed that for every action there is an opposite reaction. Sometimes the law can illustrate this principle because for every claim or defense there is usually some type of legal rejoinder. But it’s important to keep an eye on the rules of appellate procedure if you want to keep the momentum going. As an illustration, consider the recent Fourth District, Division One Court of Appeal decision Kinsella v. Kinsella.

Tamara and Kevin Kinsella lived together beginning in 1989, at which time Kevin was quite wealthy. They married in 1997, and Tamara filed for divorce in 2012. What followed was a seemingly endless series of tit-for-tat legal exchanges.

This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.

To view this content, please continue to their sites.

Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]