Marriage of Mead and Williams-Mead CA3

facts are relevant to the disposition of the sole legal question presented. The sordid details of the litigation and Robert’s two unsuccessful appeals are set forth in our two prior opinions. (In re Marriage of Mead and Williams-Mead (Nov. 1, 2007, C052999) [nonpub. opn.] (Mead I); In re Marriage of Mead and Williams-Mead (Sept. 17, 2012, C065718) [nonpub. opn.] (Mead II).) A brief paragraph will suffice as background for the resolution of Robert’s latest spurious attempt to frustrate Carolyn, his ex-wife. In December 2004 Robert and Carolyn entered into a marital settlement agreement. (Mead I, supra, C052999.) On March 8, 2005, the court entered judgment pursuant to the agreement. (Ibid.) The judgment provides: “Jurisdiction is reserved to make other orders necessary to carry out this judgment.” Among other terms, Robert agreed to pay Carolyn a $50,000 equalizing payment following the distribution of marital assets. To date Robert has not made the payment, but he has lost four motions to vacate, resisted Carolyn’s motion to enforce the settlement, filed for bankruptcy protection, and prosecuted two unsuccessful appeals in this court. (See Mead I, supra, C052999; Mead II, supra,…