Burkle

Burkle v. Burkle

Bad Law
144 Cal. App. 4th 387·50 Cal. Rptr. 3d 436
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaOctober 30, 2006B188224, B188735California6,212 words

Opinion

Opinion

Boland, J.

SUMMARY

While a marital dissolution proceeding was pending, a wife brought a separate civil action against her husband and two accounting firms. The wife claimed her husband failed to make two interim monthly payments required under the terms of a stipulation and order in the dissolution proceeding, and further claimed his conduct constituted intentional infliction of emotional distress. The wife also sought a declaration that the husband and the accounting firms were required to provide her with tax returns and related documents she had previously sought in the dissolution proceeding. Under well-established precedent precluding parties to dissolution proceedings from engaging in “family law waged by other means” (Neal v. Superior Court (2001) 90 Cal.App.4th 22, 27 [ 108 Cal.Rptr.2d 262 ]), we affirm the trial court’s judgment of dismissal.

After the trial court in the civil action sustained the husband’s demurrer, the husband sought sanctions in the family law court. The family law court granted the husband’s motion, ordering the wife to pay $32,950 to the husband as sanctions under Family Code section 271, and ordering the wife and her attorneys to pay that sum to the…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.