CA Unpub Decisions
California Unpublished Decisions
The father and the mother; collectively, the parents appeal from an order terminating their parental rights. The parents argue that the court should have invoked the exception codified in Welfare and Institutions Code section 366.26, subdivision (c)(1)(A) (the benefit exception) and adopted an alternate permanent plan for the children. The first prong of the exception requires regular visitation and contact by the parent. There is substantial evidence showing that the parents did not fulfill their requirments. The court affirmed.
|
Appellant appeals from two postjudgment orders filed seven months apart in a marital dissolution action. Respondent moves to dismiss the appeal. Respondent contends the notice of appeal was untimely filed as to one of the postjudgment orders, and appellant lacks standing to appeal from the other. The order was immediately appealable and the injured party is required to appeal in a timely manner. Waiting eight months to file the appeal was considered to be too long. The court dismissed the appeal.
|
Appellant filed a petition for writ of mandate challenging various trial court orders in this $10,000 debt collection case. For most of the orders appellant has an adequate remedy at law, and the court denied the petition on those issues. Appellant raises one issue, however, for which he does not have an adequate remedy and which must be addressed now to avoid irreparable injury. Once Appellant was granted a fee waiver, he is required to advise the court of any changes in his ability to pay the court fees. Because the order was not appropriate at that time, there was no ruling on this issue. But the court did point out that the order seemed excessive.
Palma notice was given. (Palma v. U.S. Industrial Fasteners, Inc. (1984) 36 Cal.3d 171, 180.)
|
Despite being convicted of several crimes, and despite a sentence of 31 years, counsel and the court agreed that there was no issues to be raise on appeal following a judgment and conviction for attempted murder with a personal use of firearm enhancement, a gang enhancement, and an allegation of personal infliction of great bodily injury.
|
Despite being convicted of several crimes, and despite a sentence of 31 years, counsel and the court agreed that there was no issues to be raise on appeal following a judgment and conviction for attempted murder with a personal use of firearm enhancement, a gang enhancement, and an allegation of personal infliction of great bodily injury.
|
Despite being convicted of several crimes, and despite a sentence of 31 years, counsel and the court agreed that there was no issues to be raise on appeal following a judgment and conviction for attempted murder with a personal use of firearm enhancement, a gang enhancement, and an allegation of personal infliction of great bodily injury.
|
Despite being convicted of several crimes, and despite a sentence of 31 years, counsel and the court agreed that there was no issues to be raise on appeal following a judgment and conviction for attempted murder with a personal use of firearm enhancement, a gang enhancement, and an allegation of personal infliction of great bodily injury.
|
Dependency proceeding where mother of minor appealed from juvenile court orders denying a Welfare and Institutions Code section 388 petition to modify a custody order and terminating parental rights. The mother claims that the juvenile court abused its discretion in denying her section 388 petition and erred in failing to apply the beneficial relationship exception pursuant to section 366.26 subdivision (c)(1)(A). Court affirmed the juvenile court.
|
Plaintiff appeals a judgment dismissing his action against defendant a professional corporation, entered after the trial court sustained respondents's demurrer to plaintiff's second amended complaint without leave to amend. Taub contends the trial court erred by finding: (1) the action was barred by the applicable statute of limitations; and (2) the second amended complaint failed to state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action. Court affirm the judgment.
|
This decision addressed the rulings of Jacqueline Stern, a San Diego Superior Court judge, in a trial defended by her friend Marguerite Wagner's husband, attorney Peter Dean. In this business dispute, the defendants Rysewyk were found to have breached their contract to Paul Svane. The court of appeals found that error had occurred in the trial, but it was insufficient to order a new trial.
|
Actions
Category Stats
Listings: 77266
Regular: 77266
Last listing added: 06:28:2023
Regular: 77266
Last listing added: 06:28:2023