legal news


Register | Forgot Password

The California Stockmen's Bank v. Hansen Bros

The California Stockmen's Bank v. Hansen Bros
05:16:2006

The California Stockmen's Bank v. Hansen Bros





Filed 5/1/06 The California Stockmen's Bank v. Hansen Bros. CA5


NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.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





FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT








THE CALIFORNIA STOCKMEN'S BANK,


Plaintiff and Respondent,


v.


HANSEN BROS. et al.,


Defendants and Appellants.




F049076



(Super. Ct. No. 03CECG02155)




O P I N I O N



THE COURT*


APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Fresno County. Bruce Smith, Judge.


Motschiedler, Michaelides & Wishon, LLP and Douglas V. Thorton, and Law Office of Farmer & Joy and Maurice E. Joy, Jr. for Defendant and Appellant.


McCormick, Barstow, Sheppard, Wayte & Carruth and Kurt Vote, for Plaintiff and Respondent.


-ooOoo-


STATEMENT OF THE FACTS


On July 18, 2005, the notice of entry of judgment was served.


On August 2, 2005, the notice of motion for new trial (Motion) was filed.


The Clerk of the Fresno County Superior Court refused to set a hearing on the Motion for new trial before September 20, 2005. The hearing was set for September 20, 2005.


September 16, 2005, was the expiration of the 60-day period for ruling upon the Motion.


On September 20, 2005, an order was filed denying the Motion for new trial (Order) on the ground that jurisdiction for ruling upon the Motion expired on September 16, 2005, and, on that date, the Motion was denied by operation of law.


On October 19, 2005, the notice of appeal filed.


DISCUSSION


The denial of a motion for new trial is not separately appealable and may only be reviewed on a timely appeal from the judgment noticed in July. (9 Witkin, Cal. Proc. (4th ed.) Appeal, § 123.)


California Rules of Court, rule 3 provides that the filing of a motion for new trial extends the time for filing an appeal â€





Description A decision as to motion for new trial .
Rating
0/5 based on 0 votes.

    Home | About Us | Privacy | Subscribe
    © 2025 Fearnotlaw.com The california lawyer directory

  Copyright © 2025 Result Oriented Marketing, Inc.

attorney
scale