Sole Energy Co. v. Petrominerals Corp.

Good Law
128 Cal. App. 4th 187·2005 Cal. App. LEXIS 536·2005 Daily Journal DAR 4042·26 Cal. Rptr. 3d 790·2005 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 3005
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaApril 5, 2005G030091California3,711 words

Opinion

Opinion

Fybel, J.

Introduction

Defendants Petrominerals Corporation (Petrominerals), Morris V. Hodges, Daniel H. Silverman, Kaymor Petroleum Products (Kaymor), Nevadacor Energy, Inc. (Nevadacor), and Hillcrest Beverly Oil Corporation (HBOC) (collectively defendants) moved for summary judgment on the ground plaintiff Sole Energy Company, a Texas corporation (Sole Energy Corporation), lacked standing to sue. The trial court granted the motion, and judgment was entered.

On the day the order granting summary judgment and the judgment were entered, Sole Energy Corporation filed a motion for reconsideration. At Sole Energy Corporation’s request, the trial court deemed the motion for reconsideration to be a motion for a new trial, and granted it. On appeal, defendants challenge the order granting Sole Energy Corporation’s motion for a new trial.

We hold: (1) the trial court had the discretion to treat the motion for reconsideration as a motion for a new trial, and (2) the trial court did not abuse its discretion in granting the motion for a new trial. The court’s order granting Sole Energy Corporation leave to amend the complaint to add new plaintiffs is not an appealable order. Therefore, we…

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.