Pham v. Mai-Thi Thi Nguyen
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
SILLS, P. J.
In this case we affirm a judgment after the trial court denied a continuance request stipulated to in writing by both parties. The appellant relies on a little-known statute, section 595.2 of the Code of Civil Procedure, which on its face requires the trial court to continue trials, or the hearing of any motion or demurrer, when the parties agree in writing to such a postponement. As we explain below, the statute is directory, not mandatory, so the appellant was not entitled to the requested continuance.
But even though we affirm the judgment, we must register a small plea…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Lorraine v. McCombCalifornia Supreme Court · 1934
- County of San Bernardino v. Doria Mining & Engineering Corp.California Court of Appeal · 1977
- Thurmond v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1967
- In Re Marriage of DaviesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1983
3Cited by12 opinions
- People v. EngramCalifornia Supreme Court · 2010
- Loh v. LohCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2001
- Lasalle v. Vogel, California Court of Appeal, 5th District2019
- Cotton v. Starcare Medical Group, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2010
- Clark v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1998
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.