Sheehy v. State Personnel Board
California Court of Appeal
1DissentReynoso, J.
J.—I dissent. The majority consider the issue of timeliness dispositive. However, that issue was raised by neither party. At oral argument the Attorney General specifically stated that timeliness of Sheehy’s petition was not an issue on appeal. An issue not urged on appeal is deemed waived. (Case v. City of Los Angeles (1963) 218 Cal.App.2d 36, 42 [32 Cal.Rptr. 271]; 6 Witkin, Cal. Procedure (2d ed. 1971) Appeal, § 425, pp. 4391-4393.)
While this court has inherent power, to consider all issues, even those not urged on appeal, such power is exercised with restraint and principally when the…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- People v. BassettCalifornia Supreme Court · 1968
- Morris v. County of MarinCalifornia Supreme Court · 1977
- Shepherd v. State Personnel BoardCalifornia Supreme Court · 1957
- Collins v. County of Los AngelesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1966
- Stockton v. Department of EmploymentCalifornia Supreme Court · 1944
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.