Daniel Curtis McCammon

I am a Certified Family Law Specialist and represent clients in Orange, Los Angeles, Riverside, San Bernardino, and select matters in the Central Coast and Sacramento area. I work with clients of all background, including business owners, homemakers, those with 7/8 figure wealth, attorneys, doctors, therapists, teachers, and military servicemembers and veterans. I also work with forensic accountants, therapists, mediators, loan officers, real estate agents, and attorneys in other fields to holistically resolve your family law issues.  I have a lot of experience in high conflict custody matters, including domestic and international move away, domestic violence, substance abuse, and mental health issues. While I litigate, I settle many of my cases because I maintain good relationships with my fellow family law attorneys, the Court, and other professionals, and work hard to know the facts of your matter so I can quickly work to resolve the matter with your partner/spouse. I strongly believe in the principal of informed consent. You will know where you stand and what decisions you can make so you can make the best choice for yourself and your family.  

I love the practice of family law. I know it's an unwanted service, but one that is necessary. People often come to me when they have been victims of abuse, made personal mistakes that have caused an end of a marriage or relationship, or simply have grown apart. It's hard for many people to let go of the past and the end of the relationship and move forward. That is why I work with a variety of family law related experts (financial planners, forensic accountants, life coaches, real estate professionals and therapists) to help you divide assets, heal, and take control of your future and the legacy you want to leave your loved ones.  

In my spare time, I enjoy the beach, cooking, hiking, reading, travel, and writing.

4/27/26: Ex-Parte Applications and Family Law Litigation:
Most of the time when you file motions, you will obtain a court date somewhere between 30 to 180 days away from the date of filing. For most issues, such as support, and non-emergency custody issues, that is the norm. However, what do you do if you were just victimized by an act of domestic violence? Or if your child was taken outside of the State of California without an agreement? Or did your spouse just rrun off with all the money in the joint bank account, leaving you without any bills to pay? What if you need to move a court date because of a scheduling conflict?

Those are examples of issues that you can file an Ex-Parte Application. For custody, Family Code Section 3064(a) requires "a showing of immediate harm to the child or immediate risk that the child will be removed from the State of California." For domestic violence, the acts must be of recent order (FC 3064(b).
In addition to protecting minor children, California Rules of Court 5.151(b) allows parties the right to file Ex-Parte applications to "Make orders to help prevent immediate loss or damage to property subject to disposition in the case"; or "Make orders about procedural matters, including the following:
(A) Setting a date for a hearing on the matter that is sooner than that of a regular hearing (granting an order shortening time for hearing);
(B) Shortening or extending the time required for the moving party to serve the other party with the notice of the hearing and supporting papers (grant an order shortening time for service); and
(C) Rescheduling a hearing or trial.
I have entered Stipulations as an Ex-Parte when I needed to change experts for a custody evaluations, when I was unavailable for trial because of another trial with priority, when a party removed a child from the state of California in violation of ATROS, and when someone deeded a property away to a third party.
Some issues cannot wait to be heard in a couple of months, and you should consult with an attorney who can help you navigate your Ex-Parte options.

4/28/2026: Time Conundrum's with Child/Spousal Support:
When making awards of child and spousal support, Court's will frequently apply FC 4060 which states "The monthly net disposable income shall be computed by dividing the annual net disposable income by 12. If the monthly net disposable income figure does not accurately reflect the actual or prospective earnings of the parties at the time the determination of support is made, the court may adjust the amount appropriately." In most cases, a Court will use average earnings for the past year to determine support that will be prospectively paid. However, in some situations that is not appropriate. For instance, you can have a spouse whose earnings fluctuate greatly year over year or month by month because of commission/overtime income or self employment in an area of volatile industries. I have had client's earn over a million in income one year, and less than half of that the next year. That can create a dilemma for both the supported spouse and the payor.

The Pletcher case is instructive. In Pletcher, the court stated that a trial court should not forecast future income on the most recent year of that year is not a representative sample." Also, the "ultimate yardstick is a party's ability to pay, and a court should not just punch numbers into a computer without considering the circumstances in a particular case that would make that order just or inequitable. While 12 months of past income can be used in most cases, not every case is that appropriate. The Pletcher case found that using a five-year time period was appropriate in averaging income that would be available for support prospectively. That was due to the fact that the payor's income was substantially different every year as a business owner.

I have had cases where the Court averaged income over two years. Sometimes for less than twelve months. The Court has discretion, and it's the job of family law attorneyss to assist the court in presenting evidence supporting the reason for deviating beyond a 12-month period when determining net income available for support. Doing so can ensure a fairer order for the support payor, and a lower likelihood of a quick modification of support later on.

4/28/26: Thank You All For Referral's:

This month, I have received a number of referrals from other family law attorneys, mediators, divorce coaches, a realtor, and people that I just randomly talk with at men's hair salons or networking events. Most of my cases now come from referrals, which in my opinion typically result in a better working relationship with a client. I take a lot of pride in what I do, so wanted to thank everyone for their trust in me.
5/01/26: Seven cases retained in the last month from referrals and former clients. One trial win. A son with a blue belt, and a daughter ready to put on a best actress performance today and tomorrow in Mary Poppins. She's even ready to improvise new lines in case other people mess up.

One tip to mention for this week: Obtain permanent custody orders in your Judgments and if you have the kids most of the time, the get sole physical custody orders. I am having to file a move away case for a client who has the kids more than 90% of the time, and if this client had sole physical custody then I would just need to notify the other party in writing of the intended move, and that party would need to file a motion instead of my client. FC 7501 only applies with permanent custody orders and sole physical. Very frustrating. I will win, but it's an unnecessary expense.

Next week a lot of work needs to be done with my new clients, and a personal journey comes to a head regarding faith.

5/4/26: More Referrals/Blake Lively/Justin Baldoni Settlement:

Just got another referral from my client Tanner. Thank you for the trust! Two cases retained already this month.

Today, Blake Lively and Justin Baldoni/Wayfarer resolved the civil matter Blake Lively filed against them both. Before the settlement, the Court dismissed 10/13 causes of actions that Blake filed, including sexual harassment. That dismissal completely gutted her case against Justin Baldoni, and the rest of the counts turned into a matter between her and Wayfarer. While we do not know the outcome of their settlement, clearly Blake was left with either settling this matter and moving forward with her life, or staying the course and going forward on a contentious trial, with a very uncertain result, the possibility that if she lost, her reputation would continue to crumble. Blake Lively always had more to lose than Justin Baldoni. While her movies have not been successful as her husband Ryan Reynolds, she still was successful. The last year and half of all the news leaked about the litigation and her behavior really has had a negative impact on her reputation. And it also started to impact Ryan Reynolds. It's unfortunate that a movie about surviving domestic violence turned out to be a pissing match of egos with claims of sexual harassment and breach of contract.

Everyone on both sides of these cases are talented people. Hopefully after a break in the news, Blake Lively can get into some new roles and move forward. Same with Justin Baldoni. I think highly of Ryan Reynolds work too. Get back to what your good at and make some good movies.

Happy to have a conversation about your family issues and can be contacted at my office by phone, email, in person meetings at the office, Zoom/Google Meet, WhatsApp for my prospective foreign clients at 714. 335. 463 , and Google Voice at 949. 287. 8301.