SAN JOSE — A petitioner’s appeal regarding the sale of a family home was denied, keeping a 12-year-old battle between exes alive.
In an opinion delivered on May 12 by Presiding Justice Conrad L. Rushing and associate justices Eugene M. Premo and Franklin D. Elia, the California Sixth District Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal of Timothy Loumena regarding the dissolution of family property from his ex-wife Wylmina Hettinga that dates back to 2005.
The original argument began when Hettinga did not sell the San Jose family home as ordered under community property and shifted her interest in the property to a Pacific Almaden Investments LLC , "allegedly a shell entity used by Hettinga for a variety of fraudulent purposes, including obstructing court orders and getting around her vexatious litigant status,” according to the opinion.
Pacific Almaden appealed and Loumena moved to dismiss what he claimed was a “moot” appeal only made to stop the sale of the home. By 2009, Hettinga had filed nearly 50 demands for family court orders, 18 appeals and seven lawsuits against Loumena, including five state and two federal suits. Two years later, Loumena was permitted to sell the home by a trial court in 2011, but Hettinga again refused to sell.
Calling the factual and procedural background in the case "convoluted and complex,” the panel of judges deemed that due to lack of information, "we must take judicial notice of the trial court’s statement of decision,” according to the opinion.
Loumena claims the involvement of Pacific Almaden in the family law matter is merely Hettinga’s latest attempt to disrupt the family property.
After emphasizing understanding for Loumena's frustration with his ex-wife's years of delays, the panel denied Loumena's motion to dismiss, saying the "respondent’s frustration with Hettinga’s obstructionist antics is understandable," but the appellate court affirmed the family courts original decision regarding the sale of the home.