Nazaryan v. Tonoyan
Filed 8/22/06 Nazaryan v. Tonoyan CA2/4
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.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
SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION FOUR
| MARINE NAZARYAN, Petitioner and Respondent, v. RIPSIME TONOYAN, Appellant. | B187249 (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. BD383713) |
APPEAL from orders of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Michael P. Linfield, Judge. Dismissed.
Michael B. Montgomery for Appellant.
Albert M. Graham, Jr., and Jennifer A. Culhane for Petitioner and Respondent.
PROCEDURAL AND FACTUAL BACKGROUND
Ripsime Tonoyan purports to appeal from: (1) the trial court's denial of her Code of Civil Procedure section 473 motion[1] to set aside the default entered against her on a complaint filed by respondent Marine Nazaryan and (2) the court's subsequent denial of her motion for reconsideration (§ 1008). Respondent's complaint, filed ancillary to her petition to dissolve her marriage with appellant's brother Sarkis Tonoyan, alleged that Sarkis Tonoyan had fraudulently conveyed community property to appellant. The complaint sought various remedies to set aside that transaction.
On two separate occasions, a process server personally served appellant with summons and complaint. After appellant failed to respond, respondent had a default entered on her complaint. Appellant moved unsuccessfully first to set aside the default (§ 473) and then for reconsideration of the order denying relief (§ 1008). Thereafter, appellant filed, on October 31, 2005, a notice of appeal from the trial court's rulings on the two motions. The notice of appeal states the â€
