Tuesday, January 5, 2016

Page 1

Court of Appeal Holds:

Can’t Use Conservatorship Action to Block Son’s Marriage

Rothschild Says Judge Has Inherent Powers to Dismiss Sham Proceeding

By a MetNews Staff Writer

The Court of Appeal for this district has affirmed the action of a Los Angeles Superior Court judge in tossing out a case in which a father sought to impose a conservatorship on his 28-year-old son to prevent him from getting married.

At the Sept. 19, 2013 hearing on the petition of Mohammed Shalchian to appoint him and his wife temporary conservators, the proposed conservatee’s mother, Fereshteh Shalchian, told Judge Lesley C. Green:

“I want a court order [to] stop this marriage October 5th.”

Although the mother was not a petitioner and is not an attorney, she did the talking at the hearing.

There was some reference to the proposed conservatee, Parham Shalchian, having a medical condition, but there was no evidence that it interfered with his judgment. He has a civil engineering degree from Cal State Northridge and is a project manager for a major construction company.

When his lawyer, Barry P. Goldberg, asserted that the proceeding was “an attempt to stop this marriage, which is on October 5th,” the mother did not dispute his premise, instead responding: “October 5th, yes.”

Trial Court Ruling

Green declared:

“There is no basis whatsoever for this petition.”

Pointing out that the proposed conservatee is an adult, the judge told the mother that she “may not agree with his decision” to marry, but “that’s what happens when we’re parents and our kids grow up.”

She not only denied the petition for a temporary conservatorship, but dissmissed, with prejudice, the pending petition for a permanent conservatorship, set for hearing on Oct. 9.

Mohammed Shalchian appealed.

Rothschild’s Opinion

Div. One, in an unpublished opinion on Thursday, backed Green’s decision.

In the opinion, the initials of the parties were used notwithstanding that their full names are discernible from the Superior Court and Court of Appeal dockets.

Presiding Justice Frances Rothschild wrote:

“The law and procedure relating to the trial of civil actions includes the court’s inherent authority to dismiss an action that is a sham, frivolous, or wholly vexatious….

“Although the probate court did not expressly refer to such inherent authority, it is apparent from the court’s comment that ‘[t]here is no basis whatsoever for this petition’ and its understanding that the petitions were an attempt to stop P.S.’s wedding, that the court invoked this power.…

“Here, the record supports the court’s dismissal of M.S.’s petitions under its inherent power.”

The case is Conservatorship of P.S., B251865. Goldberg, along with Matthew S. Erickson, represented Parham Shalchian; his father was in pro per.

Goldberg told the MetNews:

“The wedding was lovely and uneventful and the honeymoon took place as scheduled. In fact, the young couple has an 8 month old daughter and it is a beautiful young family now.”

He noted:

“Although the petition was in the name of the father of P.S., 100% of the effort was by the mother of P.S., Fereshteh Shalchian (who later filed some actions under the name Fereshteh Mannocheri).”

Goldberg related that the mother filed six additional actions in an effort to break up the marriage, three against Parham Shalchian’s wife, Carlee Frankel, and three against her relatives.

In the actions against the relatives, the plaintiff sought temporary restraining orders. They were denied Aug. 28, 2015, by Los Angeles Superior Court Judge John Slawson.

“In connection with the last set of cases, I filed a motion to declare Fereshteh a vexatious litigant,” Goldberg said. “After Fereshteh enlisted a lawyer to help her, the motion was vigorously contested with multiple briefs and multiple hearings.”

On Dec, 3, 2015, he advised, Slawson signed an order designating Fereshteh Shalchian a vexatious litigant, requiring that she obtain court approval before filing any further actions.