Marriage of Nelson
Appellant Jean Nelson (wife) appeals from an order of the family law court denying her motion to vacate the judgment, reopen evidence, and award her a 100 percent interest in certain assets. The court also imposed sanctions on wife for bringing the motion to vacate. Wife failed to file a timely notice of appeal from the judgment itself; the only issue before us is the courts ruling on the postjudgment motion.
Wifes motion identified two grounds upon which to set aside the judgment and to reopen the evidence: First, mandatory relief from a default on an issue arising from trial counsels mistake, and second, husbands failure to comply with his duty to disclose certain accounts, which remained unadjudicated. The trial court properly denied the motion to vacate as to the first ground, but husband undeniably failed to comply with his duty of disclosure and the judgment had failed to divide the undisclosed assets. Because the trial court retains jurisdiction to divide unadjudicated assets, which are presumptively community property, we construe the second ground of wifes motion not as a motion to vacate the judgment, but as a postjudgment motion to divide the excluded assets. (Fam. Code, 2550, et seq.)[1] The trial court erred in failing to deal with the excluded assets. In addition, because wifes motion identified a facially meritorious claimthat certain community property assets had not been dividedthe order imposing sanction upon her was erroneous. Court therefore reverse the trial courts ruling and remand for further proceedings.
Comments on Marriage of Nelson