Global Energy & Technology v. Reiner
Filed 7/19/06 Global Energy & Technology v. Reiner CA1/3
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS
California Rules of Court, rule 977(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 977(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION THREE
| GLOBAL ENERGY & TECHNOLOGY, INC., Plaintiff and Appellant, v. THOMAS REINER, Defendant and Respondent. | A107903 (Alameda County Super. Ct. No. VGO3113950) |
Plaintiff Global Energy & Technology, Inc. (Global) appeals from a summary judgment and award of attorney fees in favor of defendant Thomas Reiner. Global contends the trial court erred in granting summary judgment after Global filed a request to dismiss Reiner without prejudice. We affirm.
BACKGROUND
Global sued Sparta Olsen Electrosurgical, Inc. and Reiner as an alter ego of Sparta over payments allegedly due under a lease Reiner executed on Sparta's behalf.[1] Reiner moved for summary judgment arguing that because he was not a shareholder of Sparta, he could not be held liable as an alter ego. The motion was set for hearing on July 14, 2004; Global's opposition was due on June 30, 2004. (Code Civ. Proc., § 437c, subd. (b)(2).)
On or around June 28, 2004, Global's attorney mailed to the court a request to dismiss Reiner without prejudice. On July 7, 2004, the clerk of the court rejected the form without entering dismissal because it was not signed. Global's attorney then signed and returned the request for dismissal. It was filed on July 9, 2004, and dismissal was entered the same day.
Global neither opposed the summary judgment motion nor appeared at the hearing to contest the tentative ruling. The court found that Reiner â€
