Marriage of Samra CA4/3

Filed 11/16/15 Marriage of Samra CA4/3

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION THREE

In re Marriage of SHARANJIT and HARBHAJAN SAMRA.

SHARANJIT SAMRA, G050505 Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. 12D005321) v. OPINION HARBHAJAN SAMRA,

Appellant.

Appeal from orders of the Superior Court of Orange County, Nathan R. Scott, Judge. Affirmed in part and dismissed in part. Harbhajan Samra, in pro. per., for Appellant. No appearance for Respondent.

* * *

This appeal arises out of a marital dissolution proceeding initiated by Sharanjit Samra (Wife) against Harbhajan Samra (Husband) in 2012. Wife is the petitioner below and the respondent in this court. Husband is the respondent below and the appellant here. Husband purportedly appeals from orders dated November 12, 2013, and June 30, 2014. The November 12 orders are nonappealable and, in any event, the notice of appeal is untimely as to these orders. The June 30 order is not contained in the record provided to us. Therefore, we dismiss this appeal as to the November 12 orders and affirm the June 30 order. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY On February 19, 2013, the parties stipulated and the court ordered Husband to make certain spousal and child support payments. On July 15, Wife filed an order to show cause and affidavit for contempt alleging Husband had failed to make most of those payments. On November 8, the court found Husband in contempt and set the contempt sentencing for November 12. On November 12, the parties stipulated and the court ordered that a community property residence (Residence) be immediately listed for sale, and that Husband’s share of sale proceeds be used to satisfy his delinquent spousal and child support obligations, and to pay Wife’s attorney fees. That same day the court sentenced Husband to 480 hours of community service, but suspended execution of that sentence for so long as Husband obeyed all court orders, including the stipulated order regarding the sale of the Residence. On May 13, 2014 Wife filed an ex parte application for an order shortening time on a request for an order giving her control of the sale, together with exclusive use and possession of the Residence. Wife alleged Husband had failed to comply with the stipulated order regarding the sale of the Residence, and instead was doing everything he could to delay that sale. The court granted the order shortening time and set the matter for hearing on June 30.