Misenheimer v. Sharma
Filed 3/22/06 Misenheimer v. Sharma CA2/3
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.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
SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION THREE
| AMANDA MISENHEIMER, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. LILAVATI SHARMA, Defendant and Appellant. | B179701 (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. ES009115) |
APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Dennis L. Shanklin, Judge. Dismissed.
Michael Misenhimer, in pro. per., for Plaintiff and Respondent.
Lilavati Sharma, in pro. per., for Defendant and Appellant.
______________________________________________
Lilavati Sharma (Sharma) appeals from an order that granted an injunction against her under Code of Civil Procedure section 527.6. She also appeals from the denial of her motion for reconsideration. The latter order is not an appealable order. (Reese v. Wal‑Mart Stores (1999) 73 Cal.App.4th 1225, 1242. While the injunction order is made appealable by section 904.1, subdivision (a) (6), Sharma has not filed a timely appeal from that order and we therefore have no jurisdiction to consider the appeal. Therefore, her appeal will be dismissed.
BACKGROUND OF THE CASE
This case stems from an incident that occurred at a weekly gathering in Studio City of a group of people who protest the United States' war in Iraq. The incident later escalated into a threat made by a member of a pro-war group that was also at the gathering. Lauren Schmitt (Schmitt) , a member of the pro-war group, threatened to do gross bodily harm to appellant Sharma. Because of the threat to her physical safety, Sharma filed a petition for an injunction against Schmitt prohibiting civil harassment of her, and for a temporary restraining order. In turn, one Amanda Misenhimer (Misenhimer) filed a petition for the same relief against Sharma, asserting that Sharma had hit her on her back when Misenhimer began taking down signs that Sharma's group had posted at the protest site. The trial court heard both petitions on the same date and granted both of them, issuing an injunction order against Sharma on behalf of Misenhimer and an injunction order against Schmitt on behalf of Sharma.
The injunction orders were issued on June 25, 2004, and the court's minute order for that date states: â€
