Marriage of James
Filed 10/15/08 Marriage of James CA2/6
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS
California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION SIX
In re Marriage of ELIZABETH and STEPHEN C. JAMES. | 2d Civil No. B195073 (Super. Ct. No. D294142) (Ventura County) |
ELIZABETH JAMES, Appellant, v. STEPHEN C. JAMES, Appellant. | ORDER MODIFYING OPINION AND DENYING REHEARING [NO CHANGE IN JUDGMENT] |
THE COURT:
It is ordered that the opinion filed herein on September 15, 2008, be modified as follows:
1. On page 11, the second full paragraph beginning with "Early in the Proceedings" is deleted and the following paragraph in is inserted in its place:
Early in the proceedings, upon stipulation of the parties, the trial court ordered division of the pension based on the parties' equal community interests in the value of the pension on the date of separation. Elizabeth did not seek to modify that order. Except for a single reference in her trial brief, she did not present any evidence or argument regarding unequal division of the pension at trial. The court's order after trial did not call for unequal division of the pension. The trial court accurately observed in its post-trial ruling on the pension issue that enforcement and collection mechanisms "were not raised at trial, and were consequently not addressed in the court's June 5, 2006 ruling." Therefore, there was no basis in law or evidence for Elizabeth to insert into the judgment a provision for unequal division of the pension. Even after the judgment was entered in Elizabeth's favor, Stephen's pension was exempt from enforcement of Elizabeth's monetary judgment. (Code Civ. Proc., 704.115.)
There is no change in judgment.
Appellant's petition for rehearing is denied.
Publication courtesy of California free legal advice.
Analysis and review provided by Carlsbad Property line attorney.
