Roden

Roden v. AmerisourceBergen Corp.

Good Law
130 Cal. App. 4th 211·29 Cal. Rptr. 3d 810
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 14, 2005G034444, G034486California3,646 words

Opinion

Opinion

Moore, J.

This is the second time these parties have paid us a visit. The last time, we affirmed a postjudgment order interpreting a judgment that entitled Donald R. Roden (Roden) to collect cash and employment benefits from his former employer, Bergen Brunswig Corporation. (Roden v. Bergen Brunswig Corp. (2003) 107 Cal.App.4th 620, 623, 625 [ 132 Cal.Rptr.2d 549 ].) Since the order was affirmed, the parties have continued to squabble. Now, they disagree as to whether the court properly entered an order permitting postjudgment discovery. AmerisourceBergen Corporation, successor in interest to Bergen Brunswig Corporation, appeals from the order, claiming the court erred in permitting the discovery when no money judgment was at issue and no action was pending. It has also filed a writ petition addressing the same issues. The two matters have been consolidated.

Roden contends that the discovery order is not appealable and that writ review is not appropriate either. We agree. Code of Civil Procedure section 904.1, subdivision (a)(2) notwithstanding, not every postjudgment order is appealable. Moreover, extraordinary relief is supposed to be extraordinary. It is not available as a…

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.