Janus Services v. Jovaag CA6

Filed 6/27/13 Janus Services v. Jovaag CA6 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

JANUS SERVICES LLC, H038793 (Santa Clara County Plaintiff, Cross-Defendant and Super. Ct. No. CV210782) Respondent,

v.

JORY A. JOVAAG,

Defendant, Cross-Complainant and Appellant;

DONALD OTT,

Defendant, Cross-Defendant and Respondent;

THE JENSEN LAW FIRM,

Cross-Defendant and Respondent.

This appeal is one in a series of appeals brought by Jory Jovaag related to the termination of her 29-year purported common-law marriage to Donald Ott, and Ms. Jovaag’s action against Mr. Ott over the division of the couple’s jointly held property.1

1 Jovaag v. Ott, Santa Clara County Superior Court No. CV119884.

The present appeal is of the trial court’s order granting Janus Services, LLC’s (Janus) motion for mandatory fees and costs pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 425.16 following its successful special motion to strike (“anti-SLAPP” motion) against Ms. Jovaag. Ms. Jovaag, who is proceeding in propria persona, asserts on appeal that the trial court erred in awarding Janus fees and costs associated with its anti-SLAPP motion. STATEMENT OF THE CASE The underlying action for division of Ms. Jovaag and Mr. Ott’s jointly held property was tried in May 2011. The court ruled in favor of Mr. Ott, and issued an injunction freezing all of Ms. Jovaag’s accounts. Ms. Jovaag and Mr. Ott appeared for a further hearing on the matter on May 16, 2011, and entered into a global settlement of all issues. On June 16, 2011, Ms. Jovaag and Mr. Ott entered into a stipulation and order for the immediate transfer of Ms. Jovaag’s $370,000 in securities held in the Janus account to Mr. Ott to partially fulfill the terms of the settlement agreement. On June 30, 2011, the court entered judgment against Ms. Jovaag, and ordered her to pay Mr. Ott $967,800, with post-judgment interest in the amount of 10 percent per year. Ms. Jovaag did not transfer the funds as required under the settlement agreement. On July 26, 2011, a writ of execution and notice of levy were forwarded to Janus, along with other investment account providers in the amount of $895,034.41. In August 2011, the court denied Ms. Jovaag’s claim of exemptions. Ms. Jovaag promptly filed a notice of appeal of the judgment with this court. On December 6, 2011, this court granted Mr. Ott’s motion to dismiss Ms. Jovaag’a appeal. On January 4, 2012, this court denied Ms. Jovaag’s motion to set-aside the dismissal of the appeal. The California Supreme Court denied Ms. Jovaag’s petition for review on February 15, 2012, and this court issued the remittitur.