During these challenging times, Severson & Werson remains open and in full operation, consistent with the firm’s previously established contingency planning. While many of our attorneys and staff will be working remotely, as a firm, we continue in full operation. We are here to help, as always.

Appeals

Subscribe to California Appellate Tracker

Thank you for your desire to subscribe to Severson & Werson’s Appellate Tracker Weblog. In order to subscribe, you must provide a valid name and e-mail address. This too will be retained on our server. When you push the “subscribe button”, we will send an electronic mail to the address that you provided asking you to confirm your subscription to our Weblog. By pushing the “subscribe button”, you represent and warrant that you are over the age of 18 years old, are the owner/authorized user of that e-mail address, and are entitled to receive e-mails at that address. Our weblog will retain your name and e-mail address on its server, or the server of its web host. However, we won’t share any of this information with anyone except the Firm’s employees and contractors, except under certain extraordinary circumstances described on our Privacy Policy and (About The Consumer Finance Blog/About the Appellate Tracker Weblog) Page. NOTICE AND AGREEMENT REGARDING E-MAILS AND CALLS/TEXT MESSAGES TO LAND-LINE AND WIRELESS TELEPHONES: By providing your contact information and confirming your subscription in response to the initial e-mail that we send you, you agree to receive e-mail messages from Severson & Werson from time-to-time and understand and agree that such messages are or may be sent by means of automated dialing technology. If you have your email forwarded to other electronic media, including text messages and cellular telephone by way of VoIP, internet, social media, or otherwise, you agree to receive my messages in that way. This may result in charges to you. Your agreement and consent also extend to any other agents, affiliates, or entities to whom our communications are forwarded. You agree that you will notify Severson & Werson in writing if you revoke this agreement and that your revocation will not be effective until you notify Severson & Werson in writing. You understand and agree that you will afford Severson & Werson a reasonable time to unsubscribe you from the website, that the ability to do so depends on Severson & Werson’s press of business and access to the weblog, and that you may still receive one or more emails or communications from weblog until we are able to unsubscribe you.

To amend a judgment to name an alter ego, the plaintiff must show that the alter ego controled the litigation and were virtually represented in that proceeding, that there is a unity of interest and ownership such that the separate personalities of entities and owners no longer exists, and that an inequitable result would result if the entity's separate existence… Read More

This decision holds that while a trial court does not lose jurisdiction to amend or vacate an interlocutory order simply because a Court of Appeal has issued an order to show cause in response to a mandate petition, the trial court should generally not do so since the Court of Appeal's issuance of an OSC rather than an alternative writ… Read More

This decision dismisses an appeal as untimely.  The appealed orders were issued before the COVID-19 court closures.  The trial court's emergency rules treated dates during the closure as holidays, so under CCP 12a, the notice of appeal was due the next day which was not a holiday, namely, June 1, when the trial court reopened.  The Court of Appeal's emergency… Read More

Under the FRCivP 58(e), a judgment is final and appealable when entered, even though the district court retains jurisdiction to rule on a motion to tax costs or award attorney fees, unless the district court orders that the judgment is not final until the motion is ruled upon.  A notice of appeal filed within 30 days of entry of the… Read More

An order denying a reconsideration motion under FRCivP 59(e) brought a year after an order denying summary judgment was not appealable.  The time to appeal the denial of summary judgment had long since expired.  A delayed motion for reconsideration under FRCivP 59(e) cannot be used to resurrect the case for appeal.  The denial of a Rule 59(e) motion is appealable… Read More

In reviewing an order denying an Anti-SLAPP motion in a malicious prosecution case, the appellate court applies the norrmal standard of review, drawing all inferences in favor of the non-moving party.  Those inferences will not affect the case when it proceeds to trial.  And the appellate court's affirmance of the order denying the Anti-SLAPP motion will only preclude a summary… Read More

An order denying a motion for a judicial reference is not an appealable order even when made as an alternative to a motion to compel arbitration.  Here, the parties' agreement provided for arbitration of disputes with the exception of those involving debts secured by California real property, and as to those provided that either party could demand a judicial reference… Read More

1 2 3 6