Appeals

A superior court's order granting a writ of administrative mandate and remanding the proceeding to the administrative agency for a new hearing and determination may be an appealable order depending on the particular circumstances of the case; here a remand order contained conclusive findings construing the appellant’s by-laws, so appellate review is justified.  Read More

Resolution of the underlying lawsuit (here by a settlement) does not automatically moot an appeal by a person who unsuccessfully sought to intervene in the action, so long as effective relief may still potentially be awarded the would-be intervenor. Read More

A federal appellate court reviews a district court’s decision to enforce or quash an administrative subpoena for abuse of discretion.  Read More

A federal appellate court has jurisdiction over claims against an appellee not named in the notice of appeal if the opening brief shows the appellant challenges portions of the judgment affecting that appellee.  Read More

A district court or Bankruptcy Appellate Panel order which reverses a bankruptcy court order in part and remands for additional fact-finding is not a final appealable judgment, nor is it otherwise appealable absent certification.  Read More

In extraordinary circumstances, a Court of Appeal may issue a precedential decision denying a writ petition without first issuing an order to show cause or alternative writ, if it gives the parties ample notice of its proposed action.  Read More

The Court of Appeals lacked jurisdiction over a non-final order denying motion to compel arbitration because the motion was brought under California’s Arbitration Act, not the Federal Arbitration Act.  Read More

A Court of Appeals lacks appellate jurisdiction over a order remanding a case that was removed based on federal question jurisdictional grounds, rather than on diversity grounds under CAFA.  Read More

A party may file a second § 170.6 challenge against the trial judge if the same judge is assigned to hear a retrial of the case after a reversal on appeal, but only if the appeal was from a final judgment rather than an interlocutory order.  Read More

Upon reversal on appeal, the appellant is entitled, in the trial court's discretion, to restitution of amounts paid or other value lost under the reversed judgment, and may seek this restitution via motion without any need for a separate cross-complaint.  Read More

Debtor who failed to appeal within the 14-day bankruptcy appeal deadline from an order denying his third motion to reconsider denial of motion for sanctions for violation of the automatic stay, could not cure the untimeliness of the appeal by use of a petition for writ of mandate.  Read More

A general denial to an interpleader complaint is insufficient to raise any issue for trial as to defendant's claimed interest in the interpleaded funds; rather, a factually pleaded cross-complaint is required instead.  Read More

Failure to recite all the evidence on an issue waives a substantial evidence attack on appeal.  Read More

Trial court erred in denying appellant’s motion for a settled statement of unrecorded oral proceedings, but appellant failed to properly preserve that issue for appeal, so judgment had to be affirmed for lack of an adequate record to review.  Read More

Ordinarily, when an appeal is mooted, the appellate court simply dismisses the appeal, but it can also vacate judgment and remand to allow the trial court to dismiss the case if legislative or administrative action has mooted the entire case; here, however, the appellant itself mooted its own appeal so it should not be allowed escape the consequences of a… Read More

In this wage and hour dispute, defendant was not entitled to a writ of mandate to overturn a district court scheduling order setting trial on the issue of whether plaintiff’s contracts were employment agreements in interstate commerce and thus exempt from the Federal Arbitration Act, since defendant has an adequate remedy on appeal from any order denying its motion to… Read More

Defendant was unable to challenge domestic violence protective order on the ground that he had not consented to have a court commissioner decide the issue, because he impliedly consented to have the commissioner decide the matter by participating in the hearing and couldn’t produce an oral record of the proceedings proving he had withheld consent at that time.  Read More

Mandate was denied because it was not clear that the contractual forum selection clause applied to the claims plaintiff alleged and because the only harm petitioner would suffer by raising the issue on a normal post-judgment appeal was the cost of the trial proceedings.  Read More