Marriage of Chavez CA3

DISCUSSION

California Rules of Court, rule 5.390(a) states that on noticed motion of a party, using form FL-300, “Request for Order,” “the stipulation of the parties, case management, or the court’s own motion, the court may bifurcate one or more issues to be tried separately before other issues are tried.” (Italics added.) Accordingly, the court had the authority to bifurcate and terminate the parties’ marital status on its own motion. Moreover, “[c]onsistent with the legislative policy favoring no fault dissolution of marriage, only slight evidence is necessary to obtain bifurcation and resolution of marital status. On the other hand, a spouse opposing bifurcation must present compelling reasons for denial.” (Gionis v. Superior Court (1988) 202 Cal.App.3d 786, 790.) Here, appellant objected to the court terminating the parties’ marital status because, she argued, it would cause her to lose her health insurance. The court noted they already discussed terminating the parties’ marital status at the settlement conference. During that discussion, the court agreed to “carv[e] out the health insurance and the life insurance for when [the parties returned] in two weeks.” On this…