Marriage of Meccia CA2/5

DISCUSSION

Wife contends the trial court abused its discretion in denying her motion to vacate the judgment. Wife argues as follows: (1) the court abused its discretion because it did not examine the issues inadequately covered in the intended decision issued 14 years earlier; and (2) the court abused its discretion by not specifically determining her right to division of husband’s Public Employee Retirement System pension. Husband urges this court to affirm on various grounds, including that the record on appeal is insufficient to affirmatively establish error because it does not include the operative motion to vacate the judgment. Wife did not file a reply brief challenging husband’s argument. We agree wife has not provided a record sufficient to demonstrate reversible error on appeal. According to the case summary contained in the clerk’s transcript on appeal, wife filed her motion to vacate the judgment on February 20, 2014. However, on February 26, 2014, wife filed her “First Amended Notice of Motion & Motion For Relief from Default.” This amended motion is not contained in the record on appeal. The trial court stated at the hearing on the motion to vacate that its tentative…