In re Marriage of Djulus
Annotate this CaseThe California Constitution provided that litigating parties could stipulate that the matter may be heard and decided by a temporary judge. Without qualifying a commissioner to act and without such a stipulation, any ruling by or judgment of the commissioner is void. In this case, the parties appeared in propria persona. Marc Djulus (Marc) appealed the judgment of dissolution entered in December 2015. Among other contentions, Marc asserted the commissioner lacked jurisdiction to hear and decide the cause because the record contained insufficient evidence to support the commissioner's finding in June 2014 that Marc consented to the commissioner hearing the cause as a result of his participation as a pro se litigant in the initial hearing of the parties in March 2014, when the commissioner made several rulings ostensibly not in Marc's favor. The commissioner made this finding at the outset of a June hearing after realizing the parties had not yet been provided with and signed a form ("Stipulation for Court Commissioner to Act as Temporary Judge for All Purposes" (D-204 form)). Although Kelli McClintock (Kelli) and her counsel then signed the D-204 form, Marc refused. Rather than taking the simple step of stopping the proceedings and sending the cause back for reassignment, the commissioner instead ruled the tantamount stipulation doctrine applied, despite the absence of any evidence that Marc knew, or should have known, at the outset of the March 2014 hearing that the judicial officer was a commissioner, and despite the evidence in the record, summarized ante, that this judicial officer was initially referred to as the "court" and as a "judge" but, unfortunately, not as a "commissioner." Because on this record there was insufficient evidence to support the application of the tantamount stipulation doctrine, the Court of Appeal agreed with Marc's contention. As such, the Court felt "constrained" to reverse not only the judgment of dissolution, but all orders made by the commissioner leading up to the judgment (including any restraining order(s)).
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.