Biggins v. Bountour
Filed 5/31/06 Biggins v. Bountour CA4/3
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS
California Rules of Court, rule 977(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 977(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION THREE
| BARBARA E. BIGGINS, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. LAZAROS BOUNTOUR et al., Defendants and Respondents. | G035740 (Super. Ct. No. 04CC12510) O P I N I O N |
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Orange County, Mary Fingal Erickson, Judge. Reversed.
James J. Biggins, Jr., for Plaintiff and Appellant.
Wolff Law Corporation and Joshua M. Wolff for Defendant and Respondent Lazaros Bountour.
Wesley L. Davis for Defendant and Respondent Stephen L. Snyder.
* * *
Plaintiff Barbara E. Biggins appeals from a judgment of dismissal entered in favor of defendants Lazatros Bountour, the father of her children, and Stephen Snyder, Bountour's former attorney, after their demurrers to plaintiff's abuse of process complaint were sustained with leave to amend and she chose not to amend. Plaintiff contends the trial court erred in sustaining the demurrers on the basis her action belonged in family court. We agree and further conclude the grounds asserted in defendants' demurrers lack merit. The judgment is reversed.
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
Because this case comes to us on a demurrer for failure to state a cause of action, we accept as true the well-pleaded allegations in plaintiff's complaint. Plaintiff was married to Bountour from 1983 to 1989. In 1991, the couple reconciled. Without remarrying, they resumed living together, had two children, and purchased a home together as cotenants. In 2002, Bountour, who had been the sole bread winner, decided he no longer wanted to work and sold the family home. The following September, Bountour ended his relationship with plaintiff and presented her with a separation proposal, suggesting a division of assets, which consisted primarily of the remains of the sale of the residence. Plaintiff, through counsel, advised Bountour that a settlement without an accounting for the residence sale proceeds would be unacceptable.
On November 20, 2003, Bountour, through his attorney, Snyder, filed a â€
