Legal Opinion
Muccianti v. Willow Creek Care Center
California Court of Appeal
Decided April 23, 2003No. F038524PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
WISEMAN, J.
This case addresses application of Code of Civil Procedure section 128, subdivision (a)(8), 1 in the context of a request to vacate a multimillion-dollar verdict against a health care facility. The parties appear to assume that their request unquestionably will be granted and that we will give our judicial blessing to what is, for all practical purposes, a stipulated reversal. This assumption is based upon the parties’ apparent belief that the judgment belongs solely to them to use in a manner that is in their best interests. What they fail to recognize is that under section…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- U.S. Bancorp Mortgage Co. v. Bonner Mall PartnershipSupreme Court of the United States · 1994
- Neary v. Regents of University of CaliforniaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1992
- County of Fresno v. SheltonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1998
- Norman I. Krug Real Estate Investments, Inc. v. PraszkerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1994
- Union Bank of California v. Braille Institute of America, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2001
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Ebensteiner Co., Inc. v. Chadmar GroupCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2006
- Larner v. Los Angeles Doctors Hospital Associates, LPCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2008
- Hardisty v. HINTON & ALFERTCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2005
- Contra Costa Cnty. Children v. J.D. (In re B.D.), California Court of Appeal, 5th District2019
- Ebensteiner Co. v. Chadmar GroupCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2006
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.