Legal Opinion
Passavanti v. Williams
California Court of Appeal
Decided December 10, 1990No. E007110PublishedCited by 51 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
HOLLENHORST, Acting P. J.
Plaintiff, Jose Passavanti, appeals from the judgment entered after the court granted defendant’s third motion for summary judgment. We reverse, finding there are triable issues of fact.
I
Timeliness of the Appeal
Before reaching the merits of the appeal, we must first determine whether the appeal was timely filed. The motion for summary judgment in this case was granted on June 14, 1989, and on June 19, 1989, an “Order Granting Motion For Summary Judgment And Judgment” was signed by the judge and filed. On the second page of this order and judgment, it is noted…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Hollister Convalescent Hospital, Inc. v. RicoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1975
- Stratton v. First National Life InsuranceCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1989
- Blue Mountain Development Co. v. CarvilleCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1982
- Eddy v. SharpCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1988
- Rojes v. Riverside General HospitalCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1988
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by51 opinions
- LiMandri v. JudkinsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1997
- Trujillo v. North County Transit Dist.California Court of Appeal · 1998
- San Francisco Unified School District v. W.R. Grace & Company-ConnecticutCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1995
- Garcia v. HejmadiCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1997
- Hayter Trucking, Inc. v. Shell Western E & P, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1993
46 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.