Jackielyn Holly Abellada

Jackie Abellada has been a licensed California attorney since December of 2007. She is a member of the Minor’s Counsel Panel for Los Angeles County for the last three years and she has been certified by the State Bar of California Board of Legal Specialization as a Certified Family Law Specialist, which means she has taken and passed a written examination in Family Law; demonstrated a high level of experience in Family Law; fulfilled ongoing education requirements; and been favorably evaluated by other attorneys and judges familiar with her work. Thus, Ms. Abellada has the experience and expertise to handle various aspects of a divorce, including but not limited to parentage, child custody and visitation, child support, spousal support, attorney’s fees and costs, and property division.

Ms. Abellada also has extensive experience in law and motion, and trial, not just in family law, but, also dependency and civil litigation. She has conducted numerous successful bench trials and one jury trial. She has also obtained favorable results when representing parents who have been accused of various abuse allegations, including, but not limited to, drug/alcohol abuse, child abuse, domestic violence, and sexual abuse in matters involving with the Department of Children and Family Services; and licensed child care providers in administrative proceedings.

Ms. Abellada graduated cum laude from University of California – Los Angeles with a bachelor’s degree in Communication Studies in 2003, and received her Juris Doctor degree in 2007 from Fordham University School of Law. She has previously worked and volunteered at various non-profit organizations, including the AIDS Legal Referral Panel in San Francisco, California; the Alliance for Children’s Rights in Los Angeles, California; and the Children’s Law Center in Los Angeles, California. She has also worked at small private practice firms in Los Angeles County. Because of her non-profit background, Ms. Abellada is mindful of her clients’ attorney’s fees and costs, and, as a result, she attempts to resolve her clients’ cases as expeditiously, and cost-effectively as possible.

In her free time, she enjoys working out, shopping, reading or listening to the New Yorker, watching movies, and spending time with her dog and two cats.

Significant recent cases and/or results

Represented Plaintiffs, who were first-time home buyers, against seller and seller’s agent for undisclosed water damage and mold in the home. A jury trial that resulted in a recovery of approximately $450,000 for her clients, which includes an award of attorney’s fees and costs, and a punitive damages finding.
Represented a defendant in a defamation lawsuit. Plaintiff dismissed the case with prejudice after the parties entered into a settlement in which defendant paid a nominal sum and published a retraction.
Represented two defendants/cross-complainants in a lawsuit filed against them by a former business partner for breach of fiduciary duty, breach of implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, breach of contract, fraud in the inducement, conversion, violations of California Business & Professions Code §17200, accounting and constructive trust. The parties settled with defendants/cross-complainants paying $0 in the civil lawsuit and in the unlawful detainer filed by the landlord against the three parties.
Represented two public employees in regards to their termination due to illegal activity in front of the State Personnel Board. Both employees were able to receive a five-figure settlement, change of termination to voluntary resignation, removing all Notices of Adverse Action from their personnel file, and a neutral reference.
Represented a high earning spouse in a long-term marriage and the lower-earning spouse made at most minimum wage. The Court made a Richmond order reducing spousal support by one-half after 2 years and further reducing spousal support to $0 after 8 years.
Represented a mother in a parentage action against a biological father, who had been absent for nearly 4-5 years. Despite mother’s continued violation of the Court’s orders, which occurred prior to Ms. Abellada’s representation, the Court still found that the biological father was not a legal father to the child.
Represented a mother in a Department of Children and Family Services (“DCFS”) investigation for sexual abuse allegedly committed by father. DCFS closed the matter without filing any court case.
Represented a father accused of sexual abuse of a 16 year old, 6 year old and 3 year old in a DCFS case. After a bench trial in which the 3 children and the mother testified, the Court found that the father did not sexually abuse the children and, instead, found that the children are at risk of abuse and/or neglect due to the parental conflict between the parents that have caused the children to make false sexual abuse allegations against father.
Represented a mother in her DCFS matter that included allegations of physical abuse, drug use, sexual abuse, death of a child (who fell in a pool during a party, in which everyone was intoxicated, and accidentally died), and abuse of a sibling. Prior to Ms. Abellada’s representation, DCFS was recommending adoption. Through her zealous, but, gentle advocacy, Ms. Abellada was able to convince the Court and all counsels that mother, who was trying her best, should be given a chance for reunification. Today, said mother has both children in her custody.
Represented an out-of state father in his DCFS matter in which his 10 year old child was physical abused by mother, who was arrested. After conducting a trial in detention in which the child, the social worker and the father testified, the Court ordered an expedited ICPC for father to be completed within 3 weeks. At the next hearing, all counsels and the Court agreed to close the matter and order that father have full legal and physical custody of the child.
Represented a couple, who owned a daycare facility, in an administrative hearing. The husband was accused of physically abusing the small children. After a bench trial in which 4 children, 2 police officers, two mothers, and a state employee testfieid, the judge found that the state failed to meet its burden, i.e. preponderance of evidence, that the husband physically abused a 3 year old, which resulted in a bruise.