Mito

Mito v. Temple Recycling Center Corp.

Good Law
113 Cal. Rptr. 3d 445·187 Cal. App. 4th 276·2010 Cal. App. LEXIS 1372
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaAugust 9, 2010B219934California1,333 words

Opinion

Opinion

Rothschild, J.

Plaintiffs Karoleen and Magda Mito appeal from an order dismissing their complaint with prejudice for failure to file it within the statute of limitations. Plaintiffs presented their complaint for filing to the superior court clerk on July 24, 2008, which date was within the applicable two-year statute of limitations. The clerk rejected it on the ground that plaintiffs failed to attach the “Civil Case Cover Sheet Addendum and Statement of Location” (the Cover Sheet) required by a local court rule. Plaintiffs contend that California Rules of Court, rule 3.220(c), required the clerk to file the complaint despite absence of the Cover Sheet. We agree and reverse the judgment of dismissal and remand the case to the trial court with directions to treat the complaint as filed on July 24, 2008.

FACTS AND PROCEEDINGS BELOW

On July 24, 2008, Karoleen Mito (Mita) faxed to the Los Angeles Superior Court (LASC) a civil complaint that sought personal injury damages from defendants as a result of a motor vehicle collision on July 26, 2006. The fax included the civil case cover sheet required by California Rules of Court, rule 3.220(a), the complaint, and summons. It did not include…

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.