Marriage of Shaw CA3

Filed 11/8/21 Marriage of Shaw CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT (Butte) ----

In re the Marriage of BUFFY and JEREMY SHAW. C090801

BUFFY SHAW, (Super. Ct. No. FL044195)

Respondent,

v.

JEREMY SHAW,

Appellant.

Jeremy Shaw appeals from a postjudgment order denying his request to modify spousal support. Finding no error, we affirm the trial court’s order.

1

A judgment dissolving the parties’ marriage was entered on October 25, 2016. Following a trial in July 2017, the trial court found appellant in contempt on 12 charges of failing to pay court-ordered spousal support to Buffy Shaw. The trial court sentenced appellant to 60 days in county jail; the court stayed the sentence for 12 months, “so long as” appellant paid spousal support to respondent totaling $1,543 per month, beginning September 1, 2017. In November 2017, appellant filed a motion to modify the court’s order for spousal support. That motion was repeatedly continued until it was heard on September 11, 2018. After hearing from both parties, the trial court reduced appellant’s jail sentence to 30 days but found he lacked standing to modify the operative support order because he already was found in contempt of that order. The court issued a minute order, directing counsel to prepare a formal order. On October 3, 2018, the formal order was filed. On September 19, 2018, appellant moved the trial court to reconsider its order denying his request to modify spousal support. The court denied that motion on September 25, 2018. Appellant filed a second request to modify spousal support on May 21, 2019. The court heard that request on September 17, 2019, denied the request, and issued a minute order directing counsel for respondent to prepare a formal order. On November 12, 2019, appellant filed a notice of appeal identifying the September 17, 2019, order as the order from which he was appealing. Several months later, on January 9, 2020, the court filed its formal order following the September 17, 2019, hearing. DISCUSSION In his notice of appeal, appellant identifies the September 17, 2019, minute order as the order from which he is appealing. That order, however, is not appealable because it directs counsel to prepare a formal order. (See Smith v. Smith (2012) 208 Cal.App.4th 1074, 1091 [where a formal order is required, the minute order is not appealable].)