Lohnes

Lohnes v. ASTRON COMPUTER PRODUCTS

Good Law
115 Cal. Rptr. 2d 34·2001 Cal. App. LEXIS 3719·2001 Daily Journal DAR 13375·94 Cal. App. 4th 1150·2001 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 10750
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaDecember 27, 2001G025519California1,020 words

Opinion

Opinion

Rylaarsdam, J.

Intervener Crum & Forster appeals from a trial court’s order granting a motion to strike its complaint in intervention filed in an action against defendants Astron Computer Products and John Lee. Intervener contends the court abused its discretion. We agree and remand for further proceedings.

Facts

Plaintiff Mary Ellen Lohnes sued defendants for damages she sustained in an auto accident, which occurred almost a year earlier. Defendants answered, discovery commenced, and the court set a trial date. About two and one-half months before trial, intervener, plaintiff’s employer’s workers’ compensation carrier, filed a complaint in intervention seeking indemnification. Shortly thereafter, plaintiff voluntarily dismissed the underlying complaint. Defendants moved to strike the complaint in intervention because intervener failed to seek leave of the court before filing its complaint as provided by Code of Civil Procedure section 387. In opposition, intervener asserted that the accepted practice in Orange County did not require a petition and order granting leave before filing a complaint in intervention, and the clerk’s office advised parties as such. Accordingly, intervener…

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.