Marriage of Hoxie CA4/1

DISCUSSION

Hoxie claims he was not properly served with Duarte’s request for order or notice of hearing on the issue of sanctions and attorney’s fees. He relies on section 215, subdivision (a), which states: “[A]fter entry of a judgment of dissolution of marriage . . . no subsequent order in the proceedings[] is valid unless any prior notice otherwise required to be given to a party to the proceeding is served, in the same manner as the notice is otherwise permitted by law to be served, upon the party. For the purposes of this section, service upon the attorney of record is not sufficient.” Section 215 does not apply to these circumstances, as Duarte’s motion for sanctions was served before judgment was entered. Section 215 concerns how service must be made “after entry of a judgment,” and it is intended to address the peculiarities of dissolution cases in which a court “may retain jurisdiction indefinitely, and years may pass before” a new motion is filed. (See Gortner v. Gortner (1976) 60 Cal.App.3d 996, 999–1000 [discussing prior version of statute].) Neither the literal language nor the purpose of section 215 applies here.

3 Hoxie contends his counsel withdrew on October 10,…