Tiger Loans v. Hao 2/9
Plaintiff Tiger Loans, Inc. appeals from an amended judgment including an award of attorney fees and costs against plaintiff and in favor of defendant Yan Hao. Plaintiff complains defendant was not entitled to fees and costs. But plaintiff’s appeal from the amended judgment is untimely because the amendment only added attorney fees and costs and the time for appeal of the original judgment expired. And even if we construe plaintiff’s appeal as having been taken from the underlying attorney fee order, it too is untimely. Therefore, we dismiss the appeal.
Comments on Tiger Loans v. Hao 2/9