Marriage of Saleh CA2/6

Filed 8/16/22 Marriage of Saleh CA2/6 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 SIX

In re Marriage of SUSAN and 2d Civil No. B308125 JOSEPH SALEH. (Super. Ct. No. D375562) (Ventura County)

SUSAN SALEH,

Appellant,

v.

JOSEPH SALEH,

Respondent.

Susan Saleh appeals from the judgment after the trial court granted the petition dissolving her marriage to Joseph Saleh and ordered her to pay an attorney fee sanction. Susan1 raises 21 issues on appeal related to the evidence presented at trial. We affirm.

1 We use the parties’ first names for clarity.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY Susan and Joseph married in 1990. In 2016, Susan petitioned for dissolution of the marriage, citing irreconcilable differences. Over the next four years, Susan made numerous requests for orders related to spousal support, attorney fees, and the division of community property. The trial court ruled on some of these requests, and reserved ruling on others until trial. Trial commenced in March 2020. At the beginning of trial Susan and Joseph stipulated to the dissolution of their marriage. After receiving evidence and testimony the trial court ordered the division of certain community property assets. It also ordered Joseph to pay Susan $250 in monthly spousal support. The court reserved jurisdiction over Susan’s remaining requests, setting trial on those matters for July. Six days before the July trial, Susan requested a continuance. The trial court granted her request, continuing trial to August. Susan failed to appear at the continued trial in August. It proceeded in her absence. The trial court received various exhibits and testimony from Joseph and determined that he no longer had the ability to pay spousal support. It also concluded that Susan did not have the ability to pay spousal support, and that neither party had the ability to pay attorney fees. However, based on Susan’s conduct in the case and her refusal to engage in good-faith settlement discussions, however, the court ordered her to pay a $15,000 attorney fee sanction. Susan moved the trial court to reconsider its decision not to order Joseph to pay spousal support and its decision to order her to pay the attorney fee sanction. The court denied Susan’s motions.