Erwin
Erwin v. Briggs CA4/3
Opinion
Opinion
FACTS
Sometime prior to July 2008, Erwin and his wife, Tina, began divorce proceedings.1 Around that time, Erwin, himself an attorney, retained Briggs to represent him. Among other issues, one of the assets Tina and Erwin were required to address in their divorce was a business known as ICE, LLC (ICE). ICE did business as Christopher Stevens, a beauty salon and spa in Anaheim. ICE had been acquired from Erwin’s mother, Cheryl. As part of that transaction, Cheryl received a secured interest in ICE’s assets. In 2009, a dispute arose between Tina and Cheryl over salon operations, resulting in a lawsuit. Erwin was brought into the dispute as a cross-defendant. In January 2010, the lawsuit was settled between all parties. This agreement “was entered into outside of the family [law] matter, and outside of the jurisdiction of the Court presiding over the same.” Pursuant to the agreement’s terms, ICE was to be awarded to Erwin, who would be responsible for its operations and liabilities. Briggs advised Erwin to enter into a stipulated bifurcated judgment, with Tina reaffirming that ICE belonged to Erwin, so the issue of its ownership would not be relitigated in the divorce case.
1We…