Echeverria

Echeverria v. Bandy CA4/3

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMarch 4, 2026G064893California2,524 words

Opinion

Opinion

Filed 3/4/26 Echeverria v. Bandy CA4/

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS

California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION THREE

GLORIA ECHEVERRIA,

Plaintiff and Appellant, G064893

v. (Super. Ct. No. 30-2022- 01288605)

AMY BANDY,

OPINION

Defendant and Respondent.

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Orange County, Michael J. Strickroth, Judge. Affirmed. Graham & Associates and Anthony G. Graham for Plaintiff and Appellant. Cole Pedroza, Kenneth R. Pedroza, Nathan J. Novak; Schafer McMahon, Terrence J. Schafer and Shahla Couper for Defendant and Respondent. Gloria Echeverria appeals a judgment entered after Amy Bandy’s motion for summary judgment was granted. As we will explain below, Bandy shifted the burden on each cause of action to…

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.