Marriage of Melum CA1/1

Filed 9/30/13 Marriage of Melum CA1/1 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION ONE

In re the Marriage of LINDA RAE and NOEL TALBOT MELUM.

LINDA RAE MELUM, A137693

Respondent, (Sonoma County v. Super. Ct. No. SFL 49140) NOEL TALBOT MELUM, Appellant.

Linda Rae Melum petitioned for dissolution of her marriage to Noel Talbot Melum,1 and later filed a separate civil action against him alleging causes of action arising from the 22-year nonmarital relationship that preceded their marriage. Linda‘s motion to consolidate the two actions was denied, and the dissolution proceeding went to trial and resulted in a judgment addressing property issues. After the judgment became final, the trial court amended it at Linda‘s request to specify that it was limited to the parties‘ property and support rights against each other under the Family Code and quieted title to the properties awarded only as against claims arising out of the marriage. On appeal, Noel seeks reinstatement of the original judgment, contending the trial court lacked jurisdiction to amend it. We affirm the amended judgment.

1 As is customary in marital dissolution actions, we refer to the parties hereinafter by their first names. (In re Marriage of James and Christine C. (2008) 158 Cal.App.4th 1261, 1264, fn. 1.)

I. BACKGROUND Noel and Linda were married on April 20, 2006, and separated on June 6, 2009. The couple had lived together for more than 22 years prior to marriage and have an adult daughter. Linda filed a petition for dissolution of marriage on December 4, 2009. Linda‘s petition sought termination of the marriage, spousal support, and a determination of property rights. Noel filed a response on January 27, 2010, seeking dissolution and a determination of property rights. Linda filed a separate civil action against Noel on August 15, 2011 (commonly referred to as a Marvin2 action), alleging several Marvin causes of action arising out of the parties‘ premarital relationship. The Marvin causes of action concerned the same assets and similar equitable claims as the dissolution action. Sixteen days before the scheduled trial date in the dissolution action, Linda filed a motion to consolidate the Marvin action with the action for dissolution. Noel opposed the motion. On March 26, 2012, the court (the Hon. Robert S. Boyd) denied Linda‘s request to consolidate, finding (1) the civil action and family law action were ―in procedurally different postures,‖ (2) Linda had failed to file the motion to consolidate in the civil action as required, (3) Noel would be prejudiced should the court consolidate or coordinate the two actions, and therefore (4) it would be ―procedurally inappropriate‖ to consolidate the two actions. The family court conducted trial of the dissolution action on April 2 and 5, 2012. The court issued a tentative decision on June 27, 2012. On July 31, 2012, after each party had an opportunity to file objections to the tentative decision, the court issued its statement of decision terminating the marriage, awarding Linda spousal support, and