Marriage of Dumov CA6

Filed 4/14/23 Marriage of Dumov CA6 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

SIXTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

In re the Marriage of ANATOLY and H050180 DARYA DUMOV. (Santa Clara County Super. Ct. No. 2011-6-FL-006171)

ANATOLY DUMOV,

Respondent,

v.

DARYA KHANKIN,

Appellant.

Appellant Darya Khankin appeals from the trial court’s order denying her motion to set aside the judgment in the dissolution of her marriage to respondent Anatoly Dumov.1 Khankin argues that the trial court abused its discretion by denying her motion because Dumov failed to disclose all his assets at the time the parties entered into their marital settlement agreement (MSA). Because the record is insufficient to meet Khankin’s burden of affirmatively establishing error, we reject her claims and affirm the trial court’s order.

1 In the proceedings below, Khankin was referred to by her married name, Darya Dumov.

I. BACKGROUND A. The Judgment of Dissolution and the MSA Khankin and Dumov married in 1997, separated in 2010, and ended their marriage by an uncontested judgment of dissolution entered June 7, 2012. The judgment incorporated a written MSA that divided the parties’ assets, including several bank accounts—two Chase checking accounts, a Chase savings account, a Wells Fargo checking account, and a Wells Fargo savings account. The MSA further divided several stocks and mutual fund accounts, awarding Dumov the “Vanguard Mutual Funds” account. Both parties certified that they had made a full and complete disclosure of their assets. B. The Motion to Set Aside the Judgment On December 29, 2021, Khankin filed a motion to set aside the judgment of dissolution. In her declaration accompanying her memorandum of points and authorities, Khankin alleged that while looking through boxes at the former family residence, she had discovered bank statements that showed that Dumov had hidden community assets of over a million dollars in a previously undisclosed Washington Mutual account titled in the name of Khankin’s mother. According to Khankin, her mother had resided in Russia while she was alive and had only visited the parties in the United States on three occasions. Khankin claimed that she never accompanied her mother to a bank and that her mother had never expressed an interest in opening a bank account. Khankin believed that in 2008, a significant amount of funds were transferred from the Washington Mutual account to Dumov’s Vanguard account. In a responsive declaration opposing Khankin’s motion, Dumov averred that Khankin’s mother visited the parties in 1998, when a friend of Dumov’s who lived in Russia wanted to invest money in the United States. Dumov’s friend offered to pay Khankin and Dumov a 2 percent rate of return in exchange for facilitating his investments. To enable the friend to transfer funds from Russia to the United States, 2