Marriage of Faber CA2/1

Filed 7/24/14 Marriage of Faber CA2/1 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 ONE

In re Marriage of MARTHA FABER and B255258 STEVE FABER (L.A.S.C. No. GD053106) STEVE FABER,

Petitioner, OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING PEREMPTORY v. WRIT OF MANDATE

THE SUPERIOR COURT OF LOS ANGELES COUNTY,

Respondent;

MARTHA FABER,

Real Party in Interest.

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING; petition for writ of mandate. Dianna Gould- Saltman, Judge. Petition granted. McNamara & McNamara and James E. McNamara for Petitioner. No appearance for Respondent. Holmes and Holmes and Robert Holmes for Real Party in Interest. ___________________________

We hold that a “Stipulation and Order,” to be bound by a restraining order “in the form attached hereto,” but without a restraining order attached, did not give citee notice of the order even though he signed the stipulation. Accordingly, we vacate the order of contempt. BACKGROUND Steve Faber (Steve) and Martha Faber (Martha) married in 1994 and separated on May 29, 2013.1 They have two children, Thomas (18) and Claire (16). Martha instituted marital dissolution proceedings. On October 23, 2013, respondent court issued a temporary restraining order (TRO). The expiration date on the TRO is handwritten; on the photocopy provided as an exhibit, the expiration date appears to be “11/12/13.” Martha’s counsel, Robert K. Holmes, personally served the TRO on Steve at the Northeast District Courthouse. Approximately one month after the expiration of the order, on December 11, 2013, the parties and their counsel signed the document entitled Stipulation and Order, which was filed the next day on December 12, 2013. Paragraph 1 of the Stipulation and Order states that the Restraining Order After Hearing “shall be issued by the Court at the December 12, 2013 hearing date in the form attached hereto.” (Italics added.) Paragraph 2 states that the “personal appearance of the parties or Respondent’s counsel shall not be required,” presumably at the December 12, 2013 hearing. The remainder of the Stipulation and Order concerns Steve’s contact with the family dogs and his picking up of personal property from the family residence. The Stipulation and Order was filed on December 12, 2013. Neither Steve nor his counsel was present in court on December 12, 2013. On the same day, purportedly in compliance with the Stipulation and Order, the court issued the Restraining Order After Hearing against Steve.