Court Opinion

ID: 9726570
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 12:57:45.745249+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:25:28.605043
License: Public Domain

WALLIN, Acting P. J.
I concur in the result. The trial court’s decision to consolidate the civil action with the dissolution petition is troubling because the former included requests for mental distress and punitive damages. These claims inevitably must be supported by testimony inimical to the no fault concept of the Family Law Act. Since the majority has stricken the mental distress damages and correctly concluded the punitive damages awarded are reasonable, consolidation in this case caused no harm.
In general, however, consolidation of a civil action and a dissolution petition should only be allowed when claims other than intentional torts are at issue. Marvin claims, contract disputes or disagreements concerning the characterization of property can properly be addressed in a consolidated proceeding because they do not raise questions of fault or involve emotional fingerpointing.
A petition for a rehearing was denied October 16, 1984, and appellant’s petition for a hearing by the Supreme Court was denied December 19, 1984.