Uriarte v. Matrai CA1/4

Filed 3/25/24 Uriarte v. Matrai CA1/4 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION FOUR

MICHELE URIARTE, Plaintiff and Respondent, A165401 v. GYORGY MATRAI, (Contra Costa County Defendant and Appellant. Super. Ct. No. MSD19-02312)

MEMORANDUM OPINION1 Gyorgy Matrai, who is representing himself in a marital dissolution action with his former spouse, Michele Uriarte, appeals an order entered by the trial court on June 6, 2022, that (1) denied Matrai’s motion to disqualify Uriarte’s counsel; (2) denied Matrai’s motion to join Uriarte’s counsel as a party; (3) granted Uriarte’s motion to declare Matrai a vexatious litigant, imposed a pre-filing requirement and required an accounting to redact confidential information that Matrai has publicly filed; and (4) awarded Uriarte $2,000 in attorneys’ fees under Family Code Section 271.2

1 We resolve this case by a memorandum opinion pursuant to the

California Standards of Judicial Administration, section 8.1. 2 Neither the accounting to redact confidential information nor the fee

award would be independently appealable, but we consider them because they were part of the resolution of the vexatious litigant and disqualification motions respectively, both of which are appealable. 1

Uriarte did not file a respondent’s brief or any other documents in the appeal, so we decide the appeal based on Matrai’s opening brief and the record he supplied. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 8.220(a)(2) (future undesignated rule references are to the California Rules of Court).) We conclude that Matrai has failed to establish any error in the trial court’s June 6 order and therefore affirm. DISCUSSION This action has been pending since May 2019. In that time, Matrai has filed multiple appeals challenging various orders issued in the same underlying action. His appeals for the most part have purported to challenge non-appealable orders and have been resolved against him by summary dismissal. (See, e.g., Uriarte v. Matrai (June 1, 2023, A166135, A166232) [nonpub. opn.] 2023 Cal.App. Unpub. Lexis 3178; Uriarte v. Matrai (Mar. 29, 2023, A165471) [nonpub. opn.] 2023 Cal.App. Unpub. Lexis 1899.) Matrai has been advised previously of the importance of providing an adequate record. (Uriarte v. Matrai (Mar. 29, 2023, A165471) [nonpub. opn.] 2023 Cal.App. Unpub. Lexis 1899 at