Filed 6/26/24 Marriage of Wu and Wang CA1/5

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or 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 FIVE

In re the Marriage of JUAN WU and 

YANG WANG.

JUAN WU,

Appellant,

v.

YANG WANG,

Respondent.

 A166390

 (Alameda County

 Super. Ct. No. HF19002352)

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Juan Wu appeals from an August 2022 trial court order setting aside 

her marital settlement agreement (MSA) with her spouse, Yang Wang, and 

from an order denying her request for reconsideration of the order. We 

dismiss the appeal for lack of an appealable order.

1

1 We resolve this case by memorandum opinion. (Cal. Stds. Jud. 

Admin., § 8.1.) Our abbreviated factual recitation is drawn from the few 

relevant documents in the limited appellate record. (The record does not 

contain the MSA or a reporter’s transcript of the evidentiary hearing held on 

the MSA’s enforceability.) For convenience—and intending no disrespect—

we use the parties’ first names. We requested and received supplemental 

briefing on whether the August 2022 order is appealable.
2

Juan and Yang married in China. In 1998, they moved to California, 

where they had two children. During their marriage, they purchased real 

property, including a house in Union City (the property). In September 2010, 

they entered into the MSA. Among other things, the MSA provided that 

proceeds from the sale of the property would belong to Juan. Around this 

same time, Yang signed interspousal transfer grant deeds relating to the 

property.

In January 2019, Juan petitioned to dissolve the marriage. Thereafter, 

she urged the trial court to enforce the MSA. The court held an evidentiary 

hearing on the date of the parties’ separation and the MSA’s enforceability. 

In August 2022, the court issued a written order establishing the date of 

separation and setting aside the MSA and the deeds on the grounds that 

Juan failed to rebut the presumption of undue influence. Juan sought 

reconsideration of the order. The court denied the request. Juan appealed

both orders.

The right to appeal is governed by statute. (In re Marriage of Deal

(2022) 80 Cal.App.5th 71, 78.) Section 904.1—which lists appealable orders

and judgments—“ ‘codifies the “one final judgment rule” and provides that 

only final judgments are appealable. The one final judgment rule is based on 

the theory that piecemeal appeals are oppressive and costly, and that optimal 

appellate review is achieved by allowing appeals only after the entire action 

is resolved in the trial court.’ ” (In re Marriage of Deal, at p. 78; In re 

Marriage of Griffin (1993) 15 Cal.App.4th 685, 689 [judgment “ ‘is not 

appealable unless it is final in the sense that it decides the rights and duties 

of the parties and terminates the litigation’ ”].)
3

In her opening brief, Juan asserts the August 2022 order is appealable 

as a final judgment under Code of Civil Procedure2 section 904.1, 

subdivision (a)(1).3 Not so. The order does not terminate the litigation. 

Instead, it invalidates the MSA and the deeds, necessitating further litigation 

on the division of marital assets. As a result, further judicial action is 

essential to a final determination of the parties’ rights and obligations. (In re 

Marriage of Griffin, supra, 15 Cal.App.4th at p. 687 [no appealable final 

judgment where “[m]any issues, including spousal support and other property 

issues remain to be tried or resolved”].)

In her supplemental brief, Juan contends the August 2022 order is 

appealable under the collateral order doctrine, which authorizes an appeal 

from a trial court ruling on a matter “ ‘severable from the general subject of 

the litigation’ ” that directs “ ‘the payment of money by appellant or the 

performance of an act by or against [her].’ ” (Lester v. Lennane (2000) 84 

Cal.App.4th 536, 561.) We disagree. The order is not distinct and severable 

from the general subject of the dissolution. Instead—and as discussed

above—it is “a necessary step to the ultimate division of the parties’ entire 

marital estate.” (In re Marriage of Grimes & Mou (2020) 45 Cal.App.5th 406, 

418.) Moreover, the order does not “direct the payment of money or the 

2 Undesignated statutory references are to the Code of Civil Procedure.

3 An order setting aside an MSA is not among the appealable orders 

enumerated in the statute. Section 904.1, subdivision (a)(10) authorizes an 

appeal from an order made appealable by the Family Code, but Juan does not 

contend this subdivision provides a basis for appellate jurisdiction. And she 

does not argue the trial court’s order denying her request for reconsideration 

of the August 2022 order is appealable. (Estate of Jones (2022) 82 

Cal.App.5th 948, 955, fn. 1 [issues not raised and supported with authority 

are waived].) Nor can she, for a denial of a motion for reconsideration is not 

independently appealable. (Mack v. All Counties Trustee Services, Inc. (2018) 

26 Cal.App.5th 935, 937, fn. 1.)
4

performance of an act.” (Lester, at p. 562.) Thus, it is not appealable as a

collateral order.

When—as here—there is no appealable order or judgment, we must 

dismiss the appeal. (In re Marriage of Deal, supra, 80 Cal.App.5th at p. 78; 

In re Marriage of Levine (1994) 28 Cal.App.4th 585, 587.) “The issues raised 

herein can be resolved, if necessary, following the entry of final judgment.” 

(In re Marriage of Griffin, supra, 15 Cal.App.4th at p. 689.) We have 

considered the parties’ remaining arguments; they merit no discussion.

DISPOSITION

The appeal is dismissed. In the interests of justice, no costs are 

awarded. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 8.278(a)(5).)

Jackson, P. J.

WE CONCUR:

Simons, J.

Chou, J.

A166390/Wu v. Wang