Latson

The plaintiffs have given notice that they appealed from these three matters: (1) the order of October 8,1965, granting the motion of defendant Meyer Zeiler to dismiss the complaint and enter a summary judgment; (2) the order of summary judgment entered October 18 ; and (3) the order of November 8, denying plaintiffs’ motion that the court reconsider its ruling made October 8. We are dismissing the attempted appeals from the first and third matters because neither is appealable. (Bank of America Nat. Trust & Sav. Assn. v. Oil Well Supply Co. (1936) 12 Cal.App.2d 265, 271 [ 55 P.2d 885, 888 ], and see Desny v. Wilder (1956) 46 Cal.2d 715, 752 [ 299 P.2d 257, 278 ].) We are also reversing the summary judgment.

Stated in quite general terms, this is an action to recover from the defendants, who are doctors and hospitals, the damages resulting from an unwisely recommended removal of the plaintiff-wife’s gall bladder, and the subsequent false writeup of the condition said to exist in the bladder as a means of justifying its removal, and excusing the delay in filing this action. The complaint is drafted in six counts, the first three on behalf of plaintiff Janet L. Latson, the last…