Vyas

Vyas v. Vyas CA4/3

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaNovember 15, 2021G059409California2,015 words

Opinion

Opinion

FACTS

Sujata and Bhaskar were married in 1981. During the course of the marriage, Bhaskar worked primarily as an engineer, but he engaged in part-time work as a stockbroker between 1992 and 1997. The parties divorced in 2009. Sujata bought out Bhaskar’s separate property interest in the residence, and in 2011 Bhaskar moved to Seattle for work. In 2015, Sujata filed a “Statement of Claim” with the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA), arising out of Bhaskar working as a stockbroker during their marriage. FINRA claims are subject to arbitration and initiated online. FINRA was required to effectuate service on Bhaskar. Sujata provided FINRA an address for Bhaskar that was a post office box. The petition additionally named Bhaskar’s former employers; First Affiliated Securities and Interfirst Capital Corporation. Early in the arbitration proceeding Interfirst Capital Corporation was dismissed on the ground that any wrongdoing occurred prior to 2001, and there was a six-year statute of limitations that barred Sujata’s claim. First Affiliated Securities made no appearance.

1 We refer to the parties by their first names for the sake of clarity and intend no disrespect.

2…

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.