Harrell v. Alameda County Sheriff’s Dept. CA1/3
Plaintiff Hulen T. Harrell, appearing in propria persona, purports to appeal an order entered on February 10, 2017, denying his motion to strike defendants’ answer. Defendants have moved to dismiss the appeal on the grounds that the appeal is untimely and that the order is not appealable. We need not determine whether the appeal is timely, as the order is clearly not appealable.
“A reviewing court has jurisdiction over a direct appeal only when there is (1) an appealable order or (2) an appealable judgment. [Citation.] . . . [¶] A trial court’s order is appealable when it is made so by statute.” (Griset v. Fair Political Practices Com. (2001) 25 Cal.4th 688, 696.)
Plaintiff’s notice of appeal states that the order is appealable as a final judgment under Code of Civil Procedure section 904.1, subdivisions (a)(1). “Judgments that leave nothing to be decided between one or more parties and their adversaries, or that can be amended to encompass all controverted issues,
Comments on Harrell v. Alameda County Sheriff’s Dept. CA1/3