Pacific Bell Directory v. Law Offices of Joseph Carcione
Pacific Bell Directory v. Law Offices of Joseph Carcione
Pacific Bell Directory v. Law Offices of Joseph Carcione 02:24:2007
Pacific Bell Directory v
Pacific Bell Directory v. Law Offices of Joseph Carcione
Filed 2/21/07 Pacific Bell Directory v. Law Offices of Joseph Carcione 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.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
PACIFIC BELL DIRECTORY,
Plaintiff and Respondent,
v.
LAW OFFICES OF JOSEPH W. CARCIONE, JR.,
Defendant and Appellant.
A111347
(San MateoCounty
Super. Ct. No. CIV431640)
We dismiss as untimely this appeal by the Law Offices of Joseph W. Carcione, Jr. from a judgment upon a jury verdict in favor of Pacific Bell Directory.
On February 17, 2005, judgment was entered in favor of Pacific Bell. Notice of entry of judgment was served on February 24, 2005. The judgment included a provision that â€
Description
Because appellant's notice of appeal was untimely, the appeal must be dismissed. (See Cal. Rules of Court, rule 8.104(b); Van Beurden Ins. Services, Inc. v. Customized Worldwide Weather Ins. Agency, Inc. (1997) 15 Cal.4th 51, 56 ["The time for appealing a judgment is jurisdictional; once the deadline expires, the appellate court has no power to entertain the appeal"]; accord, Freiberg v. City of Mission Viejo, supra, 33 Cal.App.4th at p. 1488 ["The time for appeal is absolutely jurisdictional"].)
Court dismiss as untimely this appeal by the Law Offices of Joseph W. Carcione, Jr. from a judgment upon a jury verdict in favor of Pacific Bell Directory.
