Prior to the formation of the firm, I served as a founding partner in the Law Office of Cho and De La Cerra. In 2008, I had a different vision for the firm and decided to form M. Stephen Cho, Attorney at Law.

At the Law office of M. Stephen Cho, the clients are our number one priority. We are extremely aggressive and will fight hard to get you the best possible outcome. We focus on giving each and every client's individual attention and we are always mindful of the needs of each client. We pride ourselves on producing good work and stellar representation. Our attorneys will always keep each client fully informed of their case.

EC v. RS: Petitioner EC had full custody of her daughter. Respondent RS had visitation on alternating weekends. After much discussion between the Petitioner and the Respondent, Petitioner believed that the Respondent gave verbal consent to have the Petitioner move to another state with their daughter. The Respondent claimed that verbal consent was never given. After the Petitioner moved to another state, the Respondent filed an Order to Show Cause - RE: returning the child to the State of California. California had jurisdiction of the child. Petitioner hired the divorce attorneys from M. Stephen Cho's office in Rancho Cucamonga and asked the office to defend the return of the child. After a heated hearing, the Court ruled that the Petitioner had the right to move to another state with the child after assessing that the best interest of the child was to remain with the Petitioner. The Petitioner was allowed to move the child outside the State of California.

CR v. RR: Petitioner CR filed a post judgment Order to Show Cause for a modification of child custody, child support, and attorney's fee. Respondent RR hired our Rancho Cucamonga attorneys from M. Stephen Cho's office to respond to the Order to Show Cause. Both the Petitioner and the Respondent were full time county employees with virtually the same month income. However, the Petitioner claimed that the Respondent had additional income from the operation of the Respondent's business. The Petitioner claimed that the Respondent's business income was $10,000 per month, which justified an increase in the child support and an order for a recovery of Petitioner's attorney's fees. The Respondent claimed that after paying all of the business expenses, the net income was $500 a month. After a bench trial, the Court ordered an increase of child support by $2,000 and an order of approximately $25,000 in attorney's fee payable to the Petitioner by the Respondent.

Our Rancho Cucamonga office believed that the Court failed to take into account the legitimate business expenses of the Respondent and that the increase in child support by $2,000 and approximately $25,000 in attorney's fee was an abuse of discretion. Therefore, the divorce attorneys filed an appeal to the California Court of Appeals. After 15 months of waiting, the Court of Appeal reversed the child support order and the award of attorney's fee.