Ramirez v. Oxford Properties, Inc. CA4/2
Counsel for plaintiff Amanda Ramirez failed to respond to a series of orders to show cause (OSCs). As a result, her complaint was dismissed; thereafter, a defendant’s cross-complaint was also dismissed. Ramirez filed a motion to vacate. By mistake, however, she moved to vacate the dismissal of the cross-complaint, rather than the dismissal of her complaint. The trial court denied the motion for this reason. Ramirez filed another motion, this time to vacate the dismissal of her complaint, but the trial court denied it as untimely.
Ramirez filed a notice of appeal. However, again by mistake, she appealed from the denial of her second motion to vacate, rather than from the denial of her first motion to vacate.
The notice of appeal was timely with respect to both orders. In this situation, the rule is that, if only one of the orders was appealable, we may deem the appeal to be taken from the appealable order, even though the notice of appeal specified the nonappealable order.
Comments on Ramirez v. Oxford Properties, Inc. CA4/2