Carrillo

Carrillo v. Woodford CA4/1

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaAugust 26, 2013D062480California204 words

Opinion

Opinion

Irion, J.

DISCUSSION

In processing the appeal, we noticed the restraining order expired by its own terms

on June 13, 2013. We solicited supplemental letter briefs from the parties on whether the

appeal is moot and should be dismissed. Neither party responded.

Under well-established principles, this appeal is moot and must be dismissed. "If

relief granted by the trial court is temporal, and if the relief granted expires before an

appeal can be heard, then an appeal by the adverse party is moot." (Environmental

Charter High School v. Centinela Valley Union High School Dist. (2004) 122

Cal.App.4th 139, 144.) "[A]ppellate courts as a rule will not render opinions on moot

questions: '[W]hen, pending an appeal from the judgment of a lower court, and without

fault of the [respondent], an event occurs which renders it impossible for [the reviewing

court] if it should decide the case in favor of [appellant], to grant [appellant] any effectual

relief whatever, the court will not proceed to a formal judgment, but will dismiss the

appeal.' " (Ebensteiner Co., Inc. v. Chadmar Group (2006) 143 Cal.App.4th 1174, 1178-

1179.) Since the restraining order challenged by Woodford has…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.