Pillet v. Kendrick
Filed 5/8/06 Pillet v. Kendrick CA6
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.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
SIXTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
ANDREW PILLET, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. STEPHEN H. KENDRICK, Defendant and Appellant. | H028760 (Santa Clara County Super. Ct. No. CV755027) |
Appellant Stephen H. Kendrick appeals from a judgment entered against him on January 3, 2005, based on a judicially supervised settlement between him and respondent, Andrew Pillet. After entry of judgment, appellant filed a motion to vacate judgment pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 663,[1] which the trial court subsequently denied. Thereafter, the appellant filed a notice of appeal, purporting to appeal from the order denying the motion to vacate as well as the underlying judgment. After the appellant filed his opening brief, the respondent moved to dismiss the appeal. Appellant opposed the motion. Having considered the motion, we now dismiss the appeal from the judgment as not timely filed under the California Rules of Court, and deny the motion to dismiss as to the motion to vacate judgment.
Factual and Procedural Background
Respondent initiated this breach of promissory note and breach of guaranty action on January 5, 1996. In September 1997, the parties entered into a judicially supervised settlement agreement and on February 4, 1998, the trial court entered an order enforcing settlement pursuant to section 664.6. Pursuant to the terms of the settlement agreement, judgment was to be held and not entered until one year from the date of the settlement. No judgment was entered at either the time of the settlement or one year later as contemplated by the parties.
Seven years later, on December 27, 2004, respondent moved ex parte to enter judgment. Appellant opposed the application and the trial court set the matter for hearing on January 3, 2005. At the hearing, the trial court granted that motion to enter judgment and signed and filed the judgment.
Appellant's notice of appeal, filed on April 22, 2005, purports to appeal from, â€
