Marriage of Critzer CA6
This is the third appeal arising out of the dissolution of appellant David E. Critzer’s marriage to respondent Margaret L. Critzer. David, who is proceeding in pro per, appeals from an amended status-only judgment, which he maintains erroneously omits indemnification conditions ordered by the trial court. He also seeks to challenge several qualified domestic relations orders (QDRO), which were entered close in time to the amended status-only judgment. As to the amended status-only judgment, we find no prejudicial error and affirm. As to the QDROs, from which David failed to appeal, we conclude we lack appellate jurisdiction to entertain David’s challenge thereto.
Comments on Marriage of Critzer CA6