Keith E. Dolnick
Top rated Family Law attorney in Irvine, California
Law Offices of Keith E. Dolnick, A.P.C.Practice Areas: Family Law, Appellate; view more
Licensed in California since: 1997
Education: Western State University College of Law
Call today:
949-222-0426
Law Offices of Keith E. Dolnick, A.P.C.
1 Park PlazaSuite 760
Irvine, CA 92614
Details
A highly regarded family law attorney, Keith E. Dolnick is the founder of the Law Offices of Keith E. Dolnick, A.P.C. His firm is located in Irvine, California, and he represents clients throughout Orange County and other parts of the state.
Mr. Dolnick attended California State University, Fullerton, as an undergraduate, and he majored in kinesiology and earned a Bachelor of Science in 1992. He then pursued his legal education at Western State College of Law, part of Westcliff University in Irvine, and in 1995, he was awarded his Juris Doctor. Mr. Dolnick opened his firm in June 1997.
Mr. Dolnick’s practice is largely centered around divorce proceedings, and he lends his experience to clients who are concerned about child custody and visitation, the division of complex marital assets and financial obligations, alimony and child support. Many of these cases have ended up being contested rather than being settled through negotiations or mediation sessions, and he has prevailed at both the trial and appellate levels. Other family law matters that he has worked on have been the preparation and review of prenuptial and postmarital agreements, and he has helped people whose marriages have already been formally dissolved and who have subsequently petitioned the court to have parenting and support orders that had previously been issued modified or enforced.
Mr. Dolnick’s successful track record and high degree of ethics have not gone unnoticed by his fellow attorneys, and he is AV Preeminent peer-review rated,* the highest rating, through Martindale-Hubbell. A member of several legal organizations, he is admitted to practice in California as well as before the U.S. District Courts for the Central and Northern Districts of California.
*AV®, AV Preeminent®, Martindale-Hubbell Distinguished and Martindale-Hubbell Notable are certification marks used under license in accordance with the Martindale-Hubbell certification procedures, standards and policies. Martindale-Hubbell® is the facilitator of a peer-review rating process. Ratings reflect the anonymous opinions of members of the bar and the judiciary. Martindale-Hubbell® Peer Review Ratings™ fall into two categories – legal ability and general ethical standards.
Practice areas
Family Law, AppellateFocus areas
Alimony & Spousal Support, Appeals, Child Support, Custody & Visitation, Dissolution, Divorce, Domestic Violence, Marital Property, Paternity, Prenuptial Agreements, Same Sex Family Law
- 90% Family Law
- 10% Appellate
First Admitted: 1997, California
Professional Webpage: https://www.avvo.com/attorneys/92614-ca-keith-dolnick-170364...
- Member, Orange County Bar Association, 1997
- U.S. District Court Northern District of California, 1997
- Member, American Bar Association, 1997
- California, 1997
- Director, Orange County Women Lawyers, 1997
- U.S. District Court Central District of California, 1997
- Marriage of Ellis, Case Number B248860 - Published Case where the entry of the first Judgment begins the time for filing an appeal even though subsequent Judgments were entered afterwards if there is no material change in the terms of the subsequent Judgments. , 2015
- Marriage of Ackerman, Case Number G034259 - Published Case regarding Valuation of Plastic Surgery Practice and Imputation of Support., 2006
- Marriage of McHugh, Case Number G048551 - Published Case Regarding Imputation of Income for Support. , 2014
- Hayward v. Napa Superior Court, Case Number A144823 - Published Case - In this case it was discovered the private judge and the husband's attorney had a prior professional relationship that was not disclosed on the record and no written waiver was obtained. In addition, both the private judge and husband's attorney had judged each other's cases in the past without the proper disclosures and waivers being obtained. The Court of Appeal for the First District ruled the private judge should have not acted as the temporary judge and set aside all of her orders in the case and found the Marital Operating Agreement to be invalid., 2016
- American Jurisprudence Award for Evidence
- California State University, Fullerton, California, B.S. in Kinesiology, 1992
Selections
- Super Lawyers: 2013 - 2025