Legal Opinion

Hernandez v. Superior Court

California Court of Appeal

Decided February 24, 2004No. B171030PublishedCited by 19 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

YEGAN, Acting P. J.—

If plaintiff’s counsel’s serious physical illness and its debilitating effects culminating in death during the final stages of litigation are not good cause for continuing a trial and reopening of discovery, there is no such thing as good cause. A plaintiff in a personal injury action is not chargeable with the continued good health of his or her attorney. Forcing such a plaintiff to trial without counsel or adequately prepared counsel is not likely to ensure fairness, the overall policy of the law. (Gardiner Solder, Co. v. SupAlloy Corp., Inc.(1991) 232 Cal.App.3d…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. In Re Stephanie M.California Supreme Court · 1994
  2. Shamblin v. BrattainCalifornia Supreme Court · 1988
  3. In Re CortezCalifornia Supreme Court · 1971
  4. Estate of GilkisonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1998
  5. Bahl v. Bank of AmericaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2001

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by19 opinions

  1. Bongiovi v. SullivanNevada Supreme Court · 2006
  2. People v. MungiaCalifornia Supreme Court · 2008
  3. Elkins v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 2007
  4. Forrest v. Department of CorporationsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2007
  5. Lerma v. County of OrangeCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2004

14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API