Marriage of Hershberger CA2/1

Filed 5/24/13 Marriage of Hershberger CA2/1 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 ONE

In re the Marriage of B245241 RICHARD HERSHBERGER and MELIKE DEWEY HERSHBERGER. (Los Angeles County _________________________________________________________ Super. Ct. No. BD546278) RICHARD HERSHBERGER, Respondent, v.

MELIKE DEWEY HERSHBERGER, Appellant.

APPEAL from the judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County. Teresa A. Beaudet, Judge. Affirmed. _____________

Melike Dewey Hershberger, in pro. per., for Appellant. No Appearance for Respondent. _____________

Melike Dewey Hershberger, whom the superior court has determined to be a vexatious litigant, appeals from the judgment of nullity of her marriage to Richard Hershberger.1 We affirm. The underlying facts are described in our opinion in a previous, related appeal and need not be repeated in detail here. (See In re Hershberger (Aug. 31, 2012, B236505) [nonpub. opn.].) In summary, Richard suffers from dementia, and two professional fiduciaries (Emily Stuhlbarg and Richard Norene) currently serve as conservators of his person and estate. In June 2010 (before the conservatorship proceedings were initiated), Melike picked up Richard from his residence, drove him to Las Vegas, married him there, and dropped him off at his residence a few days later, having charged all expenses for the trip to his credit card. (Ibid.) On June 9, 2011, Richard’s conservators filed on his behalf a petition for nullity of his marriage to Melike. The record reflects that Melike demurred to the petition. The trial court overruled the demurrer, and the record reflects that Melike did not thereafter file a timely response to the petition. On November 1, 2012, the court conducted a “[d]efault [n]ullity [t]rial.” Melike did not appear at the trial. The court entered a judgment of nullity, and Melike timely appealed. Melike’s only argument on appeal is that the judgment is not supported by substantial evidence, because the witnesses who testified at trial did not know Richard at the time of the marriage and consequently could not know whether he was of “unsound mind,” within the meaning of subdivision (c) of Family Code section 2210, at that time.2