In re the Marriage of XIA GUO and XIAO HUA SUN.
Filed 7/28/10
CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION THREE
In re the Marriage of XIA GUO and XIAO HUA SUN.
B215595
(Los Angeles County
Super. Ct. No. GD041530)
XIA GUO,
Respondent,
v.
XIAO
HUA SUN,
Appellant.
APPEAL
from an order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles
County,
Nori Anne Walla, Judge. Affirmed.
Law
Office of Robert S. Altagen, Robert S. Altagen and Hanwei Cheng for Appellant.
Law
Offices of George L. Young and Steven L. Sugars for Respondent.
_____________________
INTRODUCTION
The
superior court entered a judgment nullifying the marriage of appellant Xiao Hua
Sun and respondent Xia Guo on the ground that Sun was married to another woman
when he purportedly married Guo. The
court also denied Sun's claim that he was Guo's putative spouse pursuant to
Family Code section 2251.[1]
Sun appeals the order denying his putative spouse claim.
A party claiming to be a putative spouse must show, among
other things, that he or she believed in good faith that the marriage was
valid. A determination of good faith is
tested by an objective standard. In this
case, the superior court found that Sun did not have an objectively reasonable
belief that he was married to Guo, and thus was not Guo's putative spouse.
There are two main issues on appeal. The first is whether there was substantial
evidence supporting the superior court's finding that Sun did not have a good
faith belief that the marriage was valid.
We shall conclude that there was substantial evidence to support that
finding.
The second issue is whether Sun can claim putative spouse
status based on Guo's alleged good faith belief in the validity of the
marriage, even though Sun did not have such a good faith belief. We hold that Sun is not a putative spouse
under these circumstances. In so
holding, we respectfully disagree with the holding in In re Marriage of Tejeda (2009) 179 Cal.App.4th 973 (
The order denying Sun's claim for putative spouse status
is affirmed.
Sun
and Guo met in North Korea in 1997 or 1998, began a romantic relationship, and
shortly thereafter moved together to Los Angeles.~(RT 318-319; 341)~ Prior to the purported marriage between Sun
and Guo, Guo knew that Sun was married to another woman in Italy.
In
approximately January 2001, Sun met with his lawyer, Tonnie Cheng, and advised
Cheng that he wanted to divorce his wife in Italy. Sun testified that although Guo was not
present at his initial meeting with Cheng, shortly thereafter Guo met Cheng and
worked with Cheng to arrange for Sun's divorce from his first wife. Guo testified that she did not meet Cheng
until one or two years after Guo
purportedly married Sun.
On
February 14, 2001--Valentine's
Day--Sun and Guo decided to marry, went to Las Vegas,
and were married that day. Both Sun and
Guo claim that at the time, they believed that Sun was already divorced from
his Italian wife and that Sun and Guo were legally married. Guo's belief that Sun divorced his first wife
prior to February 14, 2001,
was based solely on Sun's representation to her that he had done so. Although both Sun and Guo knew that Sun was
previously married, their marriage license stated that this was Sun's first
marriage.
On
February 15, 2001, Cheng
filed on behalf of Sun a petition to dissolve Sun's marriage with his Italian
wife. On August 21, 2001, the superior court entered a judgment
dissolving Sun's first marriage.
On
August 24, 2007, Guo filed
a petition for dissolution of marriage. Guo filed an amended petition on January 7, 2008. In her amended petition, Guo sought to
nullify her marriage with Sun on the ground that Sun entered into a bigamous
marriage.
On
August 15, 2008, the
superior court entered a judgment of nullity.
The court found that the marriage of Sun and Guo was illegal and void
pursuant to section 2201[2] because Sun was married at the time he
purportedly married Guo. This judgment
determined the status of the marriage only, and did not adjudicate the division
of the couple's assets.
After
the judgment, Sun sought to be declared a putative spouse. The court held a two-day bench trial on the
issue. On December 22, 2008, the court entered a memorandum of
decision. In its memorandum, the court
found that Sun did not have an objectively reasonable good faith belief that
his prior marriage was dissolved prior to his purported marriage with Guo.
On
February 17, 2009, the
court entered an order denying Sun's request for a finding of putative spouse
status. This appeal followed.
Sun does not challenge the judgment of annulment on appeal. Rather, he contends that the superior court
erroneously denied his request to be declared a putative spouse. In particular, Sun contends that the superior
court erroneously found that he did not have an objective good faith belief
that a valid marriage existed.
Sun
further contends that the superior court failed to consider Guo's good faith
belief in the validity of the marriage in determining whether Sun was Guo's
putative spouse. According to Sun, under
Family Code section 2251, he is entitled to putative spouse status even if he
did not have a good faith belief in the validity of the marriage, if Guo had
such a belief.[3]
DISCUSSION
1.
The putative spouse doctrine is â€
| Description | The superior court entered a judgment nullifying the marriage of appellant Xiao Hua Sun and respondent Xia Guo on the ground that Sun was married to another woman when he purportedly married Guo. The court also denied Sun's claim that he was Guo's putative spouse pursuant to Family Code section 2251. Sun appeals the order denying his putative spouse claim. |
| Rating |
