Legal Opinion

Hughey v. City of Hayward

California Court of Appeal

Decided April 18, 1994No. A064439PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

THE COURT. *

On a motion to dismiss this appeal, we point out an inconsistency between rule 2(b) and rule 391 of the California Rules of Court which creates uncertainty as to the date of entry of an appealable order, and we urge the Judicial Council to address the problem.

This wrongful death action was submitted to judicial arbitration, which resulted in denial of plaintiff’s claim. Plaintiff did not request a trial de novo, and judgment was entered on the arbitrator’s ruling. The judgment is nonappealable. (Code Civ. Proc., § 1141.23.)

Plaintiff moved unsuccessfully to vacate the…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Blue Mountain Development Co. v. CarvilleCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1982
  2. Rojes v. Riverside General HospitalCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1988
  3. Rabbitt v. VincenteCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1987
  4. Tillery v. RichlandCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1984
  5. In Re Marriage of AdamsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1987

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Alan v. American Honda Motor Co., Inc.California Supreme Court · 2007
  2. Strathvale Holdings v. E.B.H.California Court of Appeal · 2005
  3. Morton v. WagnerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2007
  4. Burgard v. BurgardCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1999
  5. MALATKA v. HelmCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2010

6 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