Marriage of Hiramanek CA2/2

Filed 11/18/22 Marriage of Hiramanek CA2/2 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 TWO

In re the Marriage of KAMAL B306215 and ADIL HIRAMANEK. (Santa Clara County Super. Ct. No. 2009-1-FL-149682)

KAMAL KAPADIA,

Respondent,

v.

ADIL HIRAMANEK,

Appellant.

APPEAL from the orders of the Superior Court of Santa Clara County, Roberta S. Hayashi and Deborah A. Ryan, Judges. Dismissed.

Adil Hiramanek, in pro. per., for Appellant.

No appearance for Respondent. * * * Adil Hiramanek (husband) purports to appeal two orders of the family court—namely, (1) the order denying him, as a vexatious litigant, permission to file a new motion, and (2) the order denying his mother’s request to contact his three adult children. The first order is not appealable, and husband has no standing to bring the second. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal in its entirety. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND I. Dissolution Proceedings Husband and Kamal Kapadia (wife) filed a stipulation and order in June 2009, in which husband agreed to stay away from wife and their three then-minor children. Pursuant to that agreement, wife and the kids were to stay in the family residence. II. Order Declaring Husband a Vexatious Litigant In June 2010, the family court declared husband a vexatious litigant. That order was affirmed on appeal. (In re Marriage of Hiramanek (Aug. 23, 2012, H035887) [nonpub. opn.].) III. Order Regarding Taxes and Fair Rental Value of Family Residence In January 2019, the family court issued an order regarding two still-outstanding issues from the marital