Webb v. Webb CA3

Filed 10/5/22 Webb v. Webb CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 (El Dorado) ----

MARCIA EILEEN WEBB, C093661

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. PFL20170238)

v.

MICHAEL MATHIS WEBB,

Defendant and Appellant.

In this family law proceeding, Michael Webb (father) appeals from an order declaring him a vexatious litigant and requiring him to obtain prefiling approval before filing court documents. (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 391, subd. (b)(3), 391.7, subd. (a).)1 Father contends the trial court abused its discretion because father did not repeatedly file unmeritorious motions. Finding no abuse of discretion, we will affirm the trial court’s order.

1 Undesignated statutory references are to the Code of Civil Procedure.

1

LEGAL AND FACTUAL BACKGROUND A As relevant here, a vexatious litigant is a self-represented individual who repeatedly files unmeritorious motions, pleadings, or other papers. (§ 391, subd. (b)(3).) What constitutes “repeatedly” and “unmeritorious” is left to the sound discretion of the trial court. (Morton v. Wagner (2007) 156 Cal.App.4th 963, 971 (Morton).) The nature and effect of the filings is more determinative than the number of filings. (See id. at pp. 971-972; see also Goodrich v. Sierra Vista Regional Medical Center (2016) 246 Cal.App.4th 1260, 1266-1267.) Applicable filings are so frivolous, devoid of merit, or lacking in a reasonable probability of success or excuse, that they harass the adverse party or abuse court processes. (Morton, at p. 972.) A vexatious litigant determination is appealable (In re Marriage of Deal (2020) 45 Cal.App.5th 613, 618-619), and we review the trial court’s order for abuse of discretion (Fink v. Shemtov (2010) 180 Cal.App.4th 1160, 1169). Because the trial court is in the best position to consider evidence and hold hearings on whether a litigant is vexatious, we presume the trial court’s determination is correct and imply any findings necessary to support that designation. (Golin v. Allenby (2010) 190 Cal.App.4th 616, 636.) B Marcia Linett (mother), formerly Marcia Webb, sought to dissolve her marriage with father in 2017. Father and mother have two children. In 2017, father filed a motion in the dissolution action seeking child custody orders. The trial court conducted a four-day trial in 2018 and subsequently issued a detailed order concerning child custody and visitation. The trial court found that father had committed domestic violence against mother and the children; a batterer’s treatment program had not been effective for father, who continued to blame others for his conduct; father had violated restraining orders; and father’s testimony had been argumentative,