Legal Opinion
Yeboah v. Progeny Ventures, Inc.
California Court of Appeal
Decided May 5, 2005No. B168144PublishedCited by 15 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
FLIER, J.
The parties purport to appeal, and to cross-appeal, from orders that are not appealable. We dismiss the appeals and the cross-appeal.
FACTS
The issues that arise in this purported appeal are based on the provisions of a “modified judgment” that was entered on April 28, 2000. The “modified judgment,” a complex document 19 pages long, is based on a series of stipulations entered into by the parties to this appeal. Because we conclude below that the “modified judgment” is not a final judgment, we will refer to it as the “interlocutory judgment.”
The interlocutory judgment recites a…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Zappettini v. BucklesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1914
- Gunder v. GunderCalifornia Supreme Court · 1929
- Gotschall v. DaleyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2002
- Sawyer v. Sunset Mutual Life InsuranceCalifornia Supreme Court · 1937
- National Brass Works v. WeeksCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1928
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- People v. CooperCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2007
- City of Gardena v. Rikuo Corp.California Court of Appeal · 2011
- Muller v. Fresno Community Hospital & Medical CenterCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2009
- Koshak v. MalekCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2011
- McOwen v. GrossmanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2007
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.