Reid

Reid v. Balter

Good Law
14 Cal. App. 4th 1186·18 Cal. Rptr. 2d 287·1993 Cal. App. LEXIS 369·93 Daily Journal DAR 4447·93 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 2701
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaApril 6, 1993B058279California3,739 words

Opinion

Opinion

Croskey, J.

Defendants Maureen and Herbert Balter (defendants) appeal from a judgment entered in favor of plaintiffs Lorene and Robert Reid (plaintiffs). Following a jury trial on the merits, defendants challenge an order which vacated a prior order of dismissal that had been entered after plaintiffs had failed to appear at a scheduled pretrial status conference. Defendants also challenge a subsequent order which denied their motion for discretionary dismissal for failure to timely prosecute. Plaintiffs have cross-appealed; they challenge the amount of prejudgment interest they were awarded.

In rejecting the defendants’ contentions, we conclude that (1) the challenge to the order vacating the dismissal is without merit, (2) defendants have failed to show they were prejudiced at trial by the order which denied their motion for discretionary dismissal, (3) defendants should have challenged the denial of their motion for dismissal by immediately petitioning the Court of Appeal for a writ of mandate rather than waiting to challenge it on appeal after the case was tried and judgment entered, and (4) plaintiffs are entitled to prejudgment interest based on a different rate than the one…

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.